Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: toonces3 on September 27, 2009, 06:23:18 PM
-
Hello gents.
I posted this video up in another forum...strangely enough, one focused on jets rather than prop-driven planes. Yet, the maneuver performed by the P-51 in the video has stirred up all sorts of controversy. The kicker was when one fella said, "I tried to do that in IL-2 and the plane just stalled, so it's impossible." :O :lol
Ok, so here's the deal. I am 90% certain that like a year or more ago we had a discussion about this maneuver. It's some sort of rudder snap roll reverse type thingy. My reply to Mr. Clueless above, well...let's just see what you say.
Here's the video in question. The maneuver I am referring to is at about 0:45-0:51.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmOuljdWyWI&NR=1
I realize it's the History Channel and all that...but I'm pretty sure we've discussed this over here at AH2 and decided that it can be done as portrayed. But I defer to your expert opinions; I never was very good in the Pony.
<S>
Toonces
-
That seems like an awfully quik reversal for almost any aircraft.
If it was on the History Channel, it may have been just an animated scene, but that is just a guess on my part.
Either way, enjoyed the clip.
-
I do remember discussing this maneuver...not sure where though.
-
IIRC Widewing can tell you all about it.
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,222522.msg2684356.html#msg2684356
This may be the one you want. It has a gif of the maneuver as can be done in AH
-
IIRC Widewing can tell you all about it.
*locks widewing and Tango in a closet*
-
Can this maneuver be pulled off in AH? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,267130.0.html)
-
I knew I'd seen it before (apparently over and over and over and over...).
Thanks guys, that was the info I was looking for!
oh, and Il-2 sucks! AH2 rules! :rock
-
Another cool move able to be done in Aces High... (3:15)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTbHoI4TCM8
-
:lol
-
LOL.
I miss Kennyhayes...hope that clown is doing ok. :rock
-
Hi Toonces3 and friends!
The video is an animation.
And History Channel's animations, usually are not accurate.
The P51 in that video does a "helicopter" move. VERY low forward speed, kick on left rudder and consequent rotation around vertical axis(yaw).
If one does that in a high performance airplane, very low fwd speed, i.e., near stall, and kick rudder, chances are that the plane goes into a spin, and a flat one , by the way... Most of the times, impossible to come out.
I do a different manouever. Let´s say, I'm on a Pony or Yak-9U, fighting a Spit VIII, A6M or any other tight turner.
Enemy passes by and enters a TIGHT left turn. I know I won't be able to follow him into that turn.
I point nose down and look UP, or FORWARD+UP to keep my eyes on the enemy and do an aileron roll, following enemy direction of turn(in this case, left).
When my gunsight is ahead of enemy, stop the roll, pull nose up and BAM!
Will rummage through my AH films, when I find a suitable example, I'll post it here.
The manouever as seen the History Channel film cannot be done exactly as it is shown. IMHO.
Mutley
-
*locks widewing and Tango in a closet*
What on earth possessed you to let them out in the first place.
-
What on earth possessed you to let them out in the first place.
Well it was a mistake. The 51 haas a couple of awesome reversal or "shake" moves and one is very similar to what we are discussing. It seems weird for from a flight physics standpoint but I'm no expert on the subject. I can pull the moves though.
-
Its supposed to be a snap roll but the animator didnt setup the move properly and got the physics wrong besides. Its a cross-control manoeuvre and with the P-51s acceleration its a one chance type move.
-
Well it was a mistake. The 51 haas a couple of awesome reversal or "shake" moves and one is very similar to what we are discussing. It seems weird for from a flight physics standpoint but I'm no expert on the subject. I can pull the moves though.
Are u saying that u can pull the maneuver that is in the film that toonces posted above or just good moves in the 51 in general? If you are talking about that move, if I can get with ya sometime, I'd like for you to show me how to do that. I can't make it happen.
-
Yes you can just get to speed hit full left rudder and full up elevator and to get out center rudder and immediately push hard down elevator. Dont hold the elevator in very long though. If you do it enough you can master the recovery but this is not a very useful combat move its a move of desperation.
-
Are u saying that u can pull the maneuver that is in the film that toonces posted above or just good moves in the 51 in general? If you are talking about that move, if I can get with ya sometime, I'd like for you to show me how to do that. I can't make it happen.
I'm saying I can pull a move similar to that, yes... it's very dramatic. It's also an E gobbler. Chalenge is typing about something entirely different than I am.
-
Oh I think you should share your move with the rest of us! :aok
-
Are u saying that u can pull the maneuver that is in the film that toonces posted above or just good moves in the 51 in general? If you are talking about that move, if I can get with ya sometime, I'd like for you to show me how to do that. I can't make it happen.
Would also like to see that... EXACTLY as it is in that History Channel movie. :x
-
Would also like to see that... EXACTLY as it is in that History Channel movie. :x
I never said anything about "EXACTLY"
-
I never said anything about "EXACTLY"
Sorry, my bad... :o
Mutley. :aok :salute
-
Hi Toonces3 and friends!
The video is an animation.
And History Channel's animations, usually are not accurate.
The P51 in that video does a "helicopter" move. VERY low forward speed, kick on left rudder and consequent rotation around vertical axis(yaw).
If one does that in a high performance airplane, very low fwd speed, i.e., near stall, and kick rudder, chances are that the plane goes into a spin, and a flat one , by the way... Most of the times, impossible to come out.
I do a different manouever. Let´s say, I'm on a Pony or Yak-9U, fighting a Spit VIII, A6M or any other tight turner.
Enemy passes by and enters a TIGHT left turn. I know I won't be able to follow him into that turn.
I point nose down and look UP, or FORWARD+UP to keep my eyes on the enemy and do an aileron roll, following enemy direction of turn(in this case, left).
When my gunsight is ahead of enemy, stop the roll, pull nose up and BAM!
Will rummage through my AH films, when I find a suitable example, I'll post it here.
The manouever as seen the History Channel film cannot be done exactly as it is shown. IMHO.
Mutley
actually,in the whole show of that particular video the actual pilot that was in that fight in the p51 was on the show explaining that move as it went along,now im sure it was not quite as dramatic as that and was probly not as quite a sharp turn as that but the real 51s were capable of making such moves.but in our game the 51 is not as agile as were the real life ones,not even close.some of you guys are just get way to technical about stuff to comprehend the difference between real life and in game :salute
-
actually,in the whole show of that particular video the actual pilot that was in that fight in the p51 was on the show explaining that move as it went along,now im sure it was not quite as dramatic as that and was probly not as quite a sharp turn as that but the real 51s were capable of making such moves.but in our game the 51 is not as agile as were the real life ones,not even close.some of you guys are just get way to technical about stuff to comprehend the difference between real life and in game :salute
Have been flying airplanes in real life since 1975(many times asked my colleagues, "Does blood stink? 'Cause if it stinks, I'm wounded... :D) and been flying computer "Flight Sims" and Games, since the days of the Apple II. :rock
Yes, I understand it fully... There is a HUGE difference, between real life and and games, yes, in real life one gets only 1 life... You do that move(as shown in the HC film) in a REAL real plane, you may get a GAME OVER message from Sys Admin... :D
Sometimes I wonder, howcome am still up after all, the crazy and dumb things I did. :D
Mutley
-
I knew I'd seen it before (apparently over and over and over and over...).
Thanks guys, that was the info I was looking for!
oh, and Il-2 sucks! AH2 rules! :rock
Oh man take it from a maneuver that u want to find out how and if is possible in AH and drug it all the way down to IL2 –which is completely irrelevant within the specific thread - means that your problem isn’t the maneuver it self, or how you can learn to perform it, but to repeat, circulating around the same old IL 2s bad physics propaganda chit. Im so fed up with this crap.
-
What a pile of crap that maneuver was. lol
-
I did it once in about 20 or 30 trys. Tango can explain how to do it but you'll be hard pressed to pull it off when you need to. And if you do, there's a good chance you'll get nailed doing it. If you notice Tangos video of it, he barely missed the flying lead. I thing Kazza pretty much summed the whole thing up. :salute
-
what you cant do the "triple-lindy 3/4cab fakie darkslide to fakie death move spiral" in a video game either?
you guys crack me up ...
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
I've seen the so-called replications of this maneuver in AH, and they do not compare with what was performed on the Make-Believe channel. They are impressive maneuvers, but that doesn't make them equivalent.
What you see the P-51 do on the Dogfights show is more comparable to an F-22.
-
I've seen the so-called replications of this maneuver in AH, and they do not compare with what was performed on the Make-Believe channel. They are impressive maneuvers, but that doesn't make them equivalent.
What you see the P-51 do on the Dogfights show is more comparable to an F-22.
LMAO
I thought it moved like a helicopter.
I like the show in general because of the animations but the amount of American self love in it is just too much sometimes. I would love to see a clip of an American pilot getting his bellybutton handed to him just for historical accuracy and to make void my claim. However that won't happen because it's an American show. :rofl
Edit: BTW this is sarcasm. The show reminds me of Rambo.
-
Scince when did the P51 get helocoptor blades?
-
LMAO
I thought it moved like a helicopter.
I like the show in general because of the animations but the amount of American self love in it is just too much sometimes. I would love to see a clip of an American pilot getting his bellybutton handed to him just for historical accuracy and to make void my claim. However that won't happen because it's an American show. :rofl
Edit: BTW this is sarcasm. The show reminds me of Rambo.
It's an American show.
Nothing wrong with being proud of being American.
-
It's an American show.
Nothing wrong with being proud of being American.
I too am proud of Americans. The show would be more interesting if it showed the flip side of the coin IMO, and would be more educational. This is the History Channel you know.
Portraying only US pilots in glory while showing how the perform impossible moves while executing complete ownage over the enemy is a little bit like Rambo.
-
I too am proud of Americans. The show would be more interesting if it showed the flip side of the coin IMO, and would be more educational. This is the History Channel you know.
Portraying only US pilots in glory while showing how the perform impossible moves while executing complete ownage over the enemy is a little bit like Rambo.
This is the History Channel...... not classroom. We were already talking about how bad the channel is now. It has nothing to do with showing Americans in their glory.
-
I too am proud of Americans. The show would be more interesting if it showed the flip side of the coin IMO, and would be more educational. This is the History Channel you know.
Portraying only US pilots in glory while showing how the perform impossible moves while executing complete ownage over the enemy is a little bit like Rambo.
you forgot.....HE who wins the war, writes the history! :D
-
This is the History Channel...... not classroom. We were already talking about how bad the channel is now. It has nothing to do with showing Americans in their glory.
You must be joking. I haven't seem one episode that told the story of someone who wasn't in the USAF. If one exists then you proved me wrong.
The series should be renamed to American Dogfights :D
-
you forgot.....HE who wins the war, writes the history! :D
True.
-
You must be joking. I haven't seem one episode that told the story of someone who wasn't in the USAF.
So what? It's a show made by Americans to be viewed primarily in the American market. It would make good economic sense to feature Americans predominantly.
-
You must be joking. I haven't seem one episode that told the story of someone who wasn't in the USAF. If one exists then you proved me wrong.
The series should be renamed to American Dogfights :D
not only USAF but USNAF and USMAF ,the US airforce is not the only branch of the military that flys in combat.
USNAF=united states navy air force
USMAF=united states marine air force
and there are episodes about their combat flights in DOGFIGHTS.
also heres one of japenese and russian dogfights.
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=dogfights&bcpid=1610704596&bclid=1600116540&bctid=1531249417
-
Hmm I have seen at least one Israeli ace on there too.
Japan, France, Korean/Russian, and several more.
-
So what? It's a show made by Americans to be viewed primarily in the American market. It would make good economic sense to feature Americans predominantly.
Well that's debatable. I know that History Channel is available in many countries, but that alone doesn't make your argument void.
I didn't really intend for this to get political, although I can see how it did and how my initial post contributed to that. Sorry guys!
However, I will stick to my guns that the show is a little bit like Rambo :D
-
not only USAF but USNAF and USMAF ,the US airforce is not the only branch of the military that flys in combat.
USNAF=united states navy air force
USMAF=united states marine air force
and there are episodes about their combat flights in DOGFIGHTS.
also heres one of japenese and russian dogfights.
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=dogfights&bcpid=1610704596&bclid=1600116540&bctid=1531249417
Great find, I'll watch it after work.
I generalized all of the US Air Force under one USAF. I thought that's a super set of all the branches you mentioned. If it isn't you must pardon my ignorance, I'm not American.
-
Great find, I'll watch it after work.
I generalized all of the US Air Force under one USAF. I thought that's a super set of all the branches you mentioned. If it isn't you must pardon my ignorance, I'm not American.
just pointing it out,theres more branches of the us military that fly in combat also :salute
we have whats called air national guard and reserves
the regular army also has combat air forces
but they are not all under the orders of the USAF,total different branches.
-
Well that's debatable. I know that History Channel is available in many countries, but that alone doesn't make your argument void.
I didn't really intend for this to get political, although I can see how it did and how my initial post contributed to that. Sorry guys!
However, I will stick to my guns that the show is a little bit like Rambo :D
Noooooooooo! I see your point. I was just saying that it IS an American show. If it slants that way it is understandable.
-
Only a person interested in air combat like most of us could find Polish biplanes or Chinese monoplanes attempting to put up a fight in the least interesting so I am assuming you want to see German aces or Russian aces and how they went about business. Question is what advertisers would pay for segments under that episode... probably the same ones that buy them now.
-
Two points:
1. Dogfights has featured WW1 combat where no Americans were involved.
2. The showing being American is no justification for its blatant jingoism and cherrypicking of historical anecdote. As such, the show is not a series of mini-documentaries, but mere propaganda that panders to the lowest common denominator who share the attention span of a gnat.
-
Two points:
1. Dogfights has featured WW1 combat where no Americans were involved.
2. The showing being American is no justification for its blatant jingoism and cherrypicking of historical anecdote. As such, the show is not a series of mini-documentaries, but mere propaganda that panders to the lowest common denominator who share the attention span of a gnat.
Said like a true.... umm uhhh..... ok said like someone who never changes underwear so he can tell which way they go on. :P
-
Only a person interested in air combat like most of us could find Polish biplanes or Chinese monoplanes attempting to put up a fight in the least interesting so I am assuming you want to see German aces or Russian aces and how they went about business. Question is what advertisers would pay for segments under that episode... probably the same ones that buy them now.
Not attempting to take away from your statement but I had to read it several times to understand what you meant. To be historically accurate, Poland did not use bi planes as fighters, only as recon. I have no information on Chinese fighters in WW2.
Yes, I would like to see some about Russian aces, but I would like to see more of German aces as some of these pilots flew the span of the entire war and I find their stories very captivating. When I searched last, I couldn't find an episode on the Battle of Britain which was very disappointing also. The fights over the channel, the initial match ups of BF 109's and the early spitfires, would be entertaining to most US flight enthusiasts as well I'm sure.
-
Two points:
1. Dogfights has featured WW1 combat where no Americans were involved.
2. The showing being American is no justification for its blatant jingoism and cherrypicking of historical anecdote. As such, the show is not a series of mini-documentaries, but mere propaganda that panders to the lowest common denominator who share the attention span of a gnat.
Point 2 is what I was trying to say but might have gone about it the wrong way :cry
-
I was referring to the opening minutes of the war when Poland was decimated and the Chinese likewise by the Japanese. The airplanes in those scenarios didnt last very long but there were some instances of heroics just the same. Of course you dont hear about it because the pilots are dead and so are most of those that witnessed the events and how many people are clamoring to see that in animated detail?
-
Two points:
1. Dogfights has featured WW1 combat where no Americans were involved.
2. The showing being American is no justification for its blatant jingoism and cherrypicking of historical anecdote. As such, the show is not a series of mini-documentaries, but mere propaganda that panders to the lowest common denominator who share the attention span of a gnat.
Your assertion is absurd and your description ridiculous.
-
I was referring to the opening minutes of the war when Poland was decimated and the Chinese likewise by the Japanese. The airplanes in those scenarios didnt last very long but there were some instances of heroics just the same. Of course you dont hear about it because the pilots are dead and so are most of those that witnessed the events and how many people are clamoring to see that in animated detail?
Define decimated :furious
-
I agree that Poland gave Germany more of a spanking then they expected but the reality is that Germany destroyed the Polish Air Force in the 1939 conflict and Polish forces in exile depended completely upon British aircraft afterwards. I think the common man on the street would think Polish aircraft were vaporized the minute the Luftwaffe entered their airspace which is not true but as I said the details will not be making their way to Dogfights anytime soon.
Chinese pilots were the butt of jokes for decades following WWII because their planes were technologically far behind the Japanese planes and their training could not compare to the pilots they faced. The Chinese pilots were not lacking in willingness to fight anymore than the Polish pilots were but how many stories have you heard of the Chinese pilots working with the AVG? And yet there are some very good stories of courage and tenacity to be had about both the Polish and the Chinese.
-
Well that's debatable. I know that History Channel is available in many countries, but that alone doesn't make your argument void.
It doesn't void anything. I said "primarily"
Also, probably more difficult to find Axis fighter pilots to tell stories. I'm pretty confident that a lower percentage survived the war compared to American pilots.
-
That move is do-able in-game and is very fun! Kind of disorienting the first few times you do it. Like Steve said though... it's really quite a last ditch thing, you lose all your speed and at least 2k in altitude before you can start to pull up again.
I've found the maneuver works best with one notch of flaps in-game. You really have to pick your moment with this move too cause it lines you up for a very easy shot if they are far enough behind you. I only use it when they are 200 or less off and we are moving at a pretty good clip.
-
And still no film of this 'move' so Im not accepting its anything more than a snaproll. :rolleyes:
-
I like the show in general because of the animations but the amount of American self love in it is just too much sometimes. I would love to see a clip of an American pilot getting his bellybutton handed to him just for historical accuracy and to make void my claim. However that won't happen because it's an American show. :rofl
No you didn't intend to get political. :rolleyes:
-
And still no film of this 'move' so Im not accepting its anything more than a snaproll. :rolleyes:
There is a flat plate that works similar to this move, but I have yet to figure out HTF the other one was done. I do know that the Spitfire can do the flat plate, and the Corsairs have a different reaction to the same control inputs, as the inputs cause it to do a VERY fast inverted barrel roll which then becomes a tailfirst fall from the sky if you do not get out of it soon enough. I don't know about the Jug though, and do not have the desire to attempt this at 300mph in a Zero.
-
And still no film of this 'move' so Im not accepting its anything more than a snaproll. :rolleyes:
This move has already been posted in other threads. Thanks for calling me a liar though.
-
And still no film of this 'move' so Im not accepting its anything more than a snaproll. :rolleyes:
Page 1 of this thread. SPKmes post. Click link scroll down to dTango post and click on "P-51 flat plating" . Tango does it on Kamori. :salute
-
No you didn't intend to get political. :rolleyes:
Back from my neck of the woods, my sarcasm would result in a couple of smiles. A little poking never hurt anyone?
Relax. I like Rambo.
-
This move has already been posted in other threads. Thanks for calling me a liar though.
Dont put words in my mouth just post a link.
-
It doesn't void anything. I said "primarily"
Also, probably more difficult to find Axis fighter pilots to tell stories. I'm pretty confident that a lower percentage survived the war compared to American pilots.
Your confidence is justified in the majority of cases. However the greatest axis aces did survive the war if I'm not mistaken.
This also applies to British pilots.
-
Page 1 of this thread. SPKmes post. Click link scroll down to dTango post and click on "P-51 flat plating" . Tango does it on Kamori. :salute
It isnt anything special and doesnt appear to be anything 'new.'
-
Back from my neck of the woods, my sarcasm would result in a couple of smiles. A little poking never hurt anyone?
Relax. I like Rambo.
I am relaxed, and I could care less what you think of Rambo. A lot of Americans have had their tulips handed to them trying to defend and free people all over this globe.
If that's what you need to see to get your jollies,, there's plenty of it in other programs on The History Channel. I'm sure you'll see film of enough dead or wounded Americans to make your day.
-
I am relaxed, and I could care less what you think of Rambo. A lot of Americans have had their tulips handed to them trying to defend and free people all over this globe.
If that's what you need to see to get your jollies,, there's plenty of it in other programs on The History Channel. I'm sure you'll see film of enough dead or wounded Americans to make your day.
Are you implying dead or wounded Americans make my day? Further on if so, quote where I have said that.
Take your rants and cheap shots else where, we were having a nice discussion until you joined in.
-
No problems here Saantana. I understand what you're saying.
-
No problems here Saantana. I understand what you're saying.
:D Thanks,
I'm off to watch those other dogfight shows that the thread mentioned, and maybe someone will still post an video of a similar move being performed in a pony as I haven't seen that done myself.
If this is already somewhere maybe someone could link to it.
Edit: nvm .. 1st page
-
Are you implying dead or wounded Americans make my day?
You're the one wanting to see Americans having their tulips handed to them along with a smiley face. What else does that imply? This is niether a rant or a cheapshot. I guess if you can't explain yourself it's easier to make accusations towards the party calling your bluff. I'm thinking your comments were made out of ignorance. If you've ever seen a military person who's had their bellybutton handed to them you wouldn't make such childish statements. Plus if you do watch Dogfights you'll see quite a few Americans get shot down. However they concentrate the story on the individual who actually survived the fight, not his dead or missing squadmates. You don't seem to pay anymore attention to the program than you do your own comments about it. Is that something else common in your neck of the woods?
EDIT:
Here's a list of episodes from seasons 1 and 2.
I have yet to see the Falklands Episode. It's actually the one I'm most interested in since it was the last air/sea battle in the 20th century. I'd like to see the animations of Harrier manuvers.
Season TWO
KAMIKAZE
Imperial Japan, desperate to prop up their rapidly collapsing empire, sent poorly trained volunteer pilots in suicide attacks against American naval targets. This wasn't the only time pilots used the plane itself as a weapon. German, Russian, and even US ramming tactics will be explored.
JET VS. JET
In the skies over North Korea F86s slug it out with communist MiG-15s. American pilots are in pursuit of a previously unknown glory...the title of jet ace.
THUNDERBOLT
The P-47 Thunderbolt, or Jug as it was known distinguished itself as one of the most lethal dogfighters of World War II- a classic warbird best remembered for its size, ruggedness, and reputation for protecting the pilot.
DOGFIGHTS OF THE HOLY LAND
The innovative, delta-winged MiG-21 arrives in the Middle East. Israel must acquire a fighter to counter the threat and soon settles on the French-built Mirage III. The Mirage and MiG-21 seemed destined for combat with each other...but only one will emerge as the preeminent delta-wing fighter of its day.
GUN KILLS OF VIETNAM
The era of missiles had arrived. Electronic warfare was coming of age. But when technology fails pilots are forced to do combat the old-fashioned way-maneuver in close and blow the enemy out of the sky with guns.
THE FIRST DOGFIGHTERS
Some of the greatest fighter pilots of all time engaged in epic duels over the battered landscape of France and Belgium. Fokker triplanes, Spads, and SE5s go head to head in World War I's most famous dogfights.
NO ROOM FOR ERROR
It's where a pilot can ill afford to make a mistake...but where dogfights are inexorably drawn. Down on the deck-at treetop level-the margin for error is zero.
NIGHT FIGHTERS
From Radar equipped Hellcats in the Pacific to modern stealth technology.
THE BLOODIEST DAY
May 10, 1972. The bloodiest day of air combat during the Vietnam war featured numerous twisting and turning dogfigts. Bob Lodge and Roger Locher pioneer electronic warfare and engage in one of the most exciting air battles of the war.
P-51 MUSTANG
In the European theater of world war II the P-51 Mustang proved itself to be the quintessential dogfighter and went on to become the most famous warbird in history.
DOGFIGHTS OF DESERT STORM
The planes have changed but the jeopardy remains the same. American fighter pilots pit F-15s against Iraqi MiG-25s and advanced MiG-29s as part of Operation Desert Storm.
BATTLE FOR THE FALKLANDS
The 1982 Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands triggered war with the United Kingdom. Remarkable vertical take-off and landing Sea Harriers take on Mirages and A4s in some of the best dogfights of the modern age. The British establish air superiority but the Argentines sink several ships with wave-top level attacks in A4s.
SUPERSONIC
Stories of the development of jet aircraft and their subsequent introduction into combat. Includes stories of test pilots who were the first Germans and Americans to fly these aircraft and the great air battles that were fought through the years at Supersonic speed.
DEATH OF THE LUFTWAFFE
The Luftwaffe's last great offensive was launched on January 1, 1945...called Operation Bodenplatte. Oscar Boesch was a German pilot who took part. Sandy Moats and Alden Rigby were American pilots whose airbase was swarmed by fighters. After this day, the Luftwaffe was shattered as an effective fighting force.
TUSKEGEE AIRMEN
African-American pilots of the 332nd distinguished themselves as one of the most successful fighter groups of the war, despite the bigotry and prejudice they faced from their own countrymen.
Season ONE
MIG ALLEY
Air Force fighter pilots risk their lives flying sleek F-86 Sabres above "Mig Alley" - the most dangerous piece of sky in the Korean War. The high-speed twists and turns of history's first jet dogfights pit American aces Robbie Risner and Ralph Parr in the battles of their lives against nimble Russian-built MIG-15 fighters.
AIR AMBUSH
Legendary fighter pilot, Colonel Robin Olds, sets an intricate trap for the North Vietnamese MiG-21's. His squadron, the Wolfpack, disguises its lethal F-4 Phantoms as vulnerable bombers. The MIGs scream in to challenge the Americans. The result is the most elaborate air sting of the war...CODE NAME...Operation Bolo.
FLYING TIGERS
Two weeks after Pearl Harbor, a courageous, rag-tag band of American mercenaries dare to challenge the overwhelming might of the Japanese Air Force. The legendary "Flying Tigers" slash through the skies of China, and help vanquish the unstoppable Japanese. Follow leading Tiger aces Tex Hill and John Alison as their P-40 Tomahawks fight to the death against the agile Japanese I-97 Nate.
GUADALCANAL
August 1942...the Solomon Islands. Heroic, die-hard American pilots of the tiny Cactus Air Force match skills and instincts against top Japanese aces as they battle in the skies above Guadalcanal. Legendary Marine Capt John Smith and Medal of Honor recipients Jeff De Blanc and Jim Swett pit their tough F-4F Wildcats against the relentless Japanese Zeros. At stake - the fate of the Pacific War.
HELL OVER HANOI
The skies over Vietnam. They fight in a supersonic world, where split second decisions determine if they live - or die. American F4 Phantom pilots Fred Olmsted and Dan Cherry take on the famed MiG-21 - the most feared threat in the sky. And one American, Steve Ritchie, becomes a dog fighting legend as an Air Force Ace. You're in the cockpit with some of the fiercest dogfighting ever seen in Vietnam!
THE ZERO KILLERS
1943...the skies over the Pacific. The infamous Japanese Zero is decimating American aircraft. No allied plane can match Japan's deadliest fighter plane manned by killed Imperial Navy veterans. The American Navy rushes to deploy a new fighter to take on the unstoppable Zero...the F6F Hellcat. The Zero has met its match. Now, you're in the cockpit with legendary dogfighters Robert Duncan, Hamilton McWhorter and Alex Vraciu...their epic dogfights blazing a new chapter in the annals of aerial warfare.
THE LAST GUNFIGHTER
The U.S. Navy's top fighter, the F8 Crusader flown by skilled fighter jocks Paul Speer and Phil Wood, tackles the fierce North Vietnamese MiG over the killing skies of Vietnam. Re-live one of the longest, gut-wrenching dogfights on record as Lt. Commander Richard Schaffert - out of missles and with his guns jammed - takes on a lethal MiG-17 and the best enemy pilot he's ever faced. He's got one chance - the amazing capabilities of the F8 Crusader, "the last gunfighter".
DEATH OF THE JAPANESE NAVY
1944...the Pacific. It is one of the most amazing, lopsided naval battles in history: A mighty Japanese fleet let by the Yamato, the biggest battleship in the world - versus Taffy 3, a small U.S. task unit of tin can destroyers and baby flat-tops...ships too weak to fight and too slow to run. David battles Goliath in a fight for survival - with the lives of thousands of American soldiers in the balance.
-
You're the one wanting to see Americans having their tulips handed to them along with a smiley face. What else does that imply? This is niether a rant or a cheapshot. I guess if you can't explain yourself it's easier to make accusations towards the party calling your bluff. I'm thinking your comments were made out of ignorance. If you've ever seen a military person who's had their bellybutton handed to them you wouldn't make such childish statements. Plus if you do watch Dogfights you'll see quite a few Americans get shot down. However they concentrate the story on the individual who actually survived the fight, not his dead or missing squadmates. You don't seem to pay anymore attention to the program than you do your own comments about it. Is that something else common in your neck of the woods?
You extrapolated my statements and then slapped on your own meaning. Getting 'their tulips handed to them' can have many interpretations, I don't chose which one you pick. Mine is 'losing a fight', and in Dogfights that means showing an ace winning one. It would be nice to see a stories of Axis aces, but because its a US show, this is less likely to happen. That was the point I made, sarcastically I hope.
An accusation of ignorance coming from yourself I find most amusing. ;)
Edit: That list illustrates my point :)
-
Dont put words in my mouth just post a link.
NOPE. If you want to be lazy, feel free.
-
I already saw tangos film and if thats the move... :lol
-
I already saw tangos film and if thats the move... :lol
poor example
-
You extrapolated my statements and then slapped on your own meaning. Getting 'their tulips handed to them' can have many interpretations,
Not in wartime.
An accusation of ignorance coming from yourself I find most amusing. ;)
Of course you do, just as you thought your simple minded tulips handed to them comment would be amusing. You're just not as smart or funny as you think you are.
I do agree the show would be much more interesting if there were episodes concentrating on pilots from other countries.
-
I already saw tangos film and if thats the move... :lol
Why is that laughable?
-
It doesn't void anything. I said "primarily"
Also, probably more difficult to find Axis fighter pilots to tell stories. I'm pretty confident that a lower percentage survived the war compared to American pilots.
The loss rates for the 8th AF were pretty catastrophic. It surprised me when I saw the numbers, but look at it for yourself and you'll be (unpleasantly) surprised. There's a reason why the ones who went home intact were called "lucky bastards."
With Gunther Rall still being alive, there's no excuse not to do a show with him.
-
poor example
It's the ONLY example I've ever seen. Maybe you will provide us with the film of YOU doing it. As a matter of fact, I challenge ANYONE to put up a film of their "flat plate".
-
i think alot of people missed the fact(or not) that if this move, as depicted in the film was even possible you probably would have seen it at an airshow or two
-
ok here is a question ...
which is the worst?
Great Planes
("Great American Planes" or "every piece of crap we ever flew is better than anything else anybody else ever flew")
Dogfights
("The Completely Slanted "History" of American Airmen, and Friends")
Showdown Air Combat
("Let down Air Combat", "Amazing Feats of American Airmen vs. Their Completely Inferior Opposistion")
-
With Gunther Rall still being alive, there's no excuse not to do a show with him.
yea they seem to be overlooking a lot of content there ...
-
It's the ONLY example I've ever seen. Maybe you will provide us with the film of YOU doing it.
After the crap I've endured in this thread I'm not inclined to help so...........no.
-
I'm not sure about that fast. I somehow think the film was sped up a tad. What you can do, like in that video is if you have enough E, is lift the nose yank back hard on the stick, hit the flaps. I use this all the time on spits. Works really well for one shot. Uh don't miss. :rofl :rofl
Addendum: forgot to mention to hit the left rudder.
-
After the crap I've endured in this thread I'm not inclined to help so...........no.
How convenient :lol also I don't see how you endured crap on this thread. Sounds a little over sensitive to me.
-
How convenient :lol also I don't see how you endured crap on this thread. Sounds a little over sensitive to me.
"How convenient. A definition of God that DOESN'T require looking through a telescope. Get back to work!"
-
How convenient :lol also I don't see how you endured crap on this thread. Sounds a little over sensitive to me.
Well just from the little time I've been involved with you in this thread, I've come to the comclusion that you are a love muffin so I guess we are both content.
I have no idea why you or some other noob would presume that the onus is on me to show you one move or another. I didn't create the move or claim it as my own. In fact, I've only used once or twice because it is not one to utilize with multiple cons in the area, which is where I almost always find myself. It basically leaves you hanging in the air with your nose down... takes a good 4 or 5 full secs to build E again.
You can continue to doubt its' existence if you like but.. I just don't care.
-
Back in the day when i flew with POTW this guy Rogentx ( who later flew with the 412th) used to pull off this wierd move as a last ditch escape method, is this the "flat plate"? watch the film from keepsters view zoomed in on rogents 51, you'll see this whacked donut flat cavitation. he pulls it a bit too early and gets pinged but you can see the intent of quickly disappearing beneath the piper of an enemy on his six......
dasmuppets.com/public/billyd/film60.ahf (http://dasmuppets.com/public/billyd/film60.ahf)
-
Well just from the little time I've been involved with you in this thread, I've come to the comclusion that you are a love muffin so I guess we are both content.
I have no idea why you or some other noob would presume that the onus is on me to show you one move or another. I didn't create the move or claim it as my own. In fact, I've only used once or twice because it is not one to utilize with multiple cons in the area, which is where I almost always find myself. It basically leaves you hanging in the air with your nose down... takes a good 4 or 5 full secs to build E again.
You can continue to doubt its' existence if you like but.. I just don't care.
I was thinking of a witty reply but all of what I can come up with can be summarized by
:rolleyes:
-
Back in the day when i flew with POTW this guy Rogentx ( who later flew with the 412th) used to pull off this wierd move as a last ditch escape method, is this the "flat plate"? watch the film from keepsters view zoomed in on rogents 51, you'll see this whacked donut flat cavitation. he pulls it a bit too early and gets pinged but you can see the intent of quickly disappearing beneath the piper of an enemy on his six......
dasmuppets.com/public/billyd/film60.ahf (http://dasmuppets.com/public/billyd/film60.ahf)
No its an outside snaproll. The 'flat plate' that tango did is not a new manoeuvre either and like I said... desperation will make people do stupid things sometimes but you cant blame them for trying (I guess).
-
I generally seperate my plane into a few pieces and move them in different directions. It confuses the con obviously as they almost always pull off.
Now sometimes you'll have another guy come shoot at your largest piece. I usually ignore them as they usually miss and I make it to the ground.
-
I was thinking of a witty reply but all of what I can come up with can be summarized by
:rolleyes:
He obliquely called you a noob. :lol
-
He obliquely called you a noob. :lol
Don't forget love muffin! :huh
;)
-
I generally seperate my plane into a few pieces and move them in different directions. It confuses the con obviously as they almost always pull off.
Now sometimes you'll have another guy come shoot at your largest piece. I usually ignore them as they usually miss and I make it to the ground.
I don't know Shuff you managed to keep your TBM in one piece a couple of weeks ago while I rode my stall down and became fish food. That was some very good flying. :lol
-
I'm not sure about that fast. I somehow think the film was sped up a tad. What you can do, like in that video is if you have enough E, is lift the nose yank back hard on the stick, hit the flaps. I use this all the time on spits. Works really well for one shot. Uh don't miss. :rofl :rofl
Addendum: forgot to mention to hit the left rudder.
Speed is a critical part in making that move happen with a P51. I've talked to Tango a few times about this and I think that even he would tell you that for the hours upon hours of practice it would take someone to do this at will, is not worth the payoff. After the plane recovers, you're totally out of E and the badguy just zooms up and away.
-
He obliquely called you a noob. :lol
And I guess that makes me the other noob. But I've been around here long enough to know when I checked this thread out again, 9 hours later, I wouldn't see a film. :D
-
Yes this maneuver can be done in AH I have used it many many times, I also use 2 other reversal manuvers at low level usually when its only 1V1 if performed while 2 or more are persuing it could result in a catastrophic collision for hunter or the hunted. Case in point several nights ago I was in complete defencive manuvering with a 5V1 one being dadrabbit in his F4u4. My manuver wasn,t used as a means to force a collision but to change direction to 90 degrees off persuit line and perpendicular to line of persuit dropping speed to just above stall and providing a snap shot to the side of NME aircraft and extending out the other direction.Dadrabbit was the third plane in line and I opened up to hit second plane but instead I was face to face with dadrabbits f4u4 and he caught the full force of my gunfire directly in the canopy. I didnt survive the encounter but I did recieve that a boys for the manuvering. 1 Pilot saying its one of the best manuvers he has ever seen as he watched from above. All in all the manuvers that are depicted on the history channel are from first hand accounts from the pilots themselves and put to computer animation.
-
And I guess that makes me the other noob. But I've been around here long enough to know when I checked this thread out again, 9 hours later, I wouldn't see a film. :D
Forgetting yourself aren't you?
Unless you have a film that disproves such a move?
Can you post it?
Kidding aside, can you prove nobody does this move?
You haven't done this move, but it doesn't prove other, more experienced and talented sticks haven't
Or are you going to stick to your guns simply because you can't do the move?
Usually I can tolerate such rudeness from noobs but it seems to be growing more common place. You and a couple of others have convinced me to not help, but rather just club you baby seals from now on.
-
Forgetting yourself aren't you?
Unless you have a film that disproves such a move?
Can you post it?
Kidding aside, can you prove nobody does this move?
You haven't done this move, but it doesn't prove other, more experienced and talented sticks haven't
Or are you going to stick to your guns simply because you can't do the move?
Usually I can tolerate such rudeness from noobs but it seems to be growing more common place. You and a couple of others have convinced me to not help, but rather just club you baby seals from now on.
:lol Steve Steve Steve. Your a arrogant little watermelon aren't you?
We must not talk back or question Steve and his ability or we'll be called baby seal noobs :rofl And have to cower in fear of the Steve club :rolleyes: Are you kiddin me!? Comeon wit your bad self :rofl God forbid you think I'm rude :rofl :rofl
Some point in time you have came away with the impression that your a internet rock star. People have blown so much smoke up your butt that you think your the best and can't be beat.
Get over yourself already. PS I fly on the weekends and bring your club. But hang on to it tight cause it just may come around and hit ya in the back on the head when you least expect it :eek: You're dismissed :O
-
Forgetting yourself aren't you?
Unless you have a film that disproves such a move?
Can you post it?
Kidding aside, can you prove nobody does this move?
You haven't done this move, but it doesn't prove other, more experienced and talented sticks haven't
Or are you going to stick to your guns simply because you can't do the move?
Usually I can tolerate such rudeness from noobs but it seems to be growing more common place. You and a couple of others have convinced me to not help, but rather just club you baby seals from now on.
:rolleyes:
-
I smell talent oozing from my monitor... must be an overdose situation. It really sucks when the press uses so many positive adjectives...
-
:lol Steve Steve Steve. Your a arrogant little watermelon aren't you?
We must not talk back or question Steve and his ability or we'll be called baby seal noobs :rofl And have to cower in fear of the Steve club :rolleyes: Are you kiddin me!? Comeon wit your bad self :rofl God forbid you think I'm rude :rofl :rofl
Some point in time you have came away with the impression that your a internet rock star. People have blown so much smoke up your butt that you think your the best and can't be beat.
Get over yourself already. PS I fly on the weekends and bring your club. But hang on to it tight cause it just may come around and hit ya in the back on the head when you least expect it :eek: You're dismissed :O
You're pretty dense. You've missed my point entirely. Maybe someone will clue you in.
As for your flying. Please.. been there done that, schooled you.
-
We must not question Steve and his ability to smoke up
:D :rofl :O :rofl
-
baby seal noobs have to cower in fear of the Steve butt club, But hang on to it tight cause it just may come in the back when you least expect it :eek: You're dismissed :O
:rofl :rofl :aok :rofl :O
-
You're pretty dense. You've missed my point entirely. Maybe someone will clue you in.
As for your flying. Please.. been there done that, schooled you.
:rolleyes:
We get it, your all talk. There's only so many ways you can say it.
-
:rolleyes:
We get it, your all talk. There's only so many ways you can say it.
After having had one good fight after another with Steve I feel like you have gone on long enough. If he says he can do something I believe him, I have seen his films and seen enough personally to respect his abilities. At this point I cant blame him for not wanting to duel you or post film, frankly I am surprised he is even still in this thread. The P-51 is capable of crazy seemingly impossible maneuvers if one only takes the time to learn them.
Strip
-
You try that move in front of me and I'll pixelate ya :D
-
I can attest that Steve is hardly all talk.
-
I will give the first person who can provide a film showing that maneuver done in a P51 in AH or a real film of a WWII aircraft doing that maneuver the same gift.
I.E. the move of flying level nose to nose on an opponent, then rotate around the Yaw axis for a shot. Hmm maybe if you had your tail shot off at just the right moment.
This move can not be done in AH or in real life. The closest move to it is a Lambshavok but those tend to be more a pitch over/tumble.
HiTech
-
I.E. the move of flying level nose to nose on an opponent, then rotate around the Yaw axis for a shot.
HiTech
I've never seen it come out level... the nose always drops(quite a bit) when the plane flips around.
-
You try that move in front of me and I'll pixelate ya :D
I don't think it works unless the bad guy is close aboard your 6 and if you were that close on my 6, I'd already be dead. :D
-
Now I understand why there was no film, cough.
;) owned.
-
Now I understand why there was no film, cough.
;) owned.
Dale is referring to the first/exact move. I said there is a similar move. I also said earlier in the thread: It basically leaves you hanging in the air with your nose down... takes a good 4 or 5 full secs to build E again.
Dale also said:
then rotate around the Yaw axis for a shot
I never said anything about gettting a shot opportunity.
Try to actually understand what you are attempting to read.
-
Dale is referring to the first/exact move. I said there is a similar move. I also said earlier in the thread: It basically leaves you hanging in the air with your nose down... takes a good 4 or 5 full secs to build E again.
Try to actually understand what you are attempting to read.
It's called sarcasm. If you followed your own advice maybe you would understand.
Don't take yourself so seriously :aok
-
It's called sarcasm. If you followed your own advice maybe you would understand.
Don't take yourself so seriously :aok
Well we haven't been having a friendly exchange, you and I. I just figured it was another attack. If I missed the humor, I apologize.
-
double post, sorry.
-
I will give the first person who can provide a film showing that maneuver done in a P51 in AH or a real film of a WWII aircraft doing that maneuver the same gift.
I.E. the move of flying level nose to nose on an opponent, then rotate around the Yaw axis for a shot. Hmm maybe if you had your tail shot off at just the right moment.
This move can not be done in AH or in real life. The closest move to it is a Lambshavok but those tend to be more a pitch over/tumble.
HiTech
Hitech means the 'Lomcevak' of course (just in case you never heard of it):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRhUo_EeZDk
Not a really good example of a Lomcevak but close enough. Even if you did it perfectly it would either set you up for a collision or leave you hanging out like a 'cherry' and we all know how that ends.
-
Well we haven't been having a freindly exchange you and I. I just figured it was another attack. If I missed the humor, I apologize.
No need, sarcasm or not. ;)
See you in the MA, eventually. :confused:
-
Now I understand why there was no film, cough.
;) owned.
We didn't need HT to tell us that the maneuver in Dogfights is CGI bullpoop.
There's lots of funky maneuvers that you can perform in the AH P-51D, and we've seen some pretty astounding films, but none of them replicate what is depicted in Dogfights. I said the same thing many months ago in a similar thread.
-
However... the snaproll I suggested is a good one to learn if you can master it (big if). You can use it to slow down very quickly and in a number of situations that can be very handy... and I DO NOT mean slow down to no speed at all (bad idea).
-
And of course we know someone is going to try the Lomcevak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDgRCcS_yzE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skfprThzUq4&NR=1
-
I'm wondering why Dogfights would simulate such a move. Did someone say he did it?
Shuf, where you been? I haven't been shot down by you lately :D.
-
I'm wondering why Dogfights would simulate such a move. Did someone say he did it?
Shuf, where you been? I haven't been shot down by you lately :D.
I've been in LW. <S> :)
I have flown in MW a little when the kiddies are not on.
-
I'm wondering why Dogfights would simulate such a move. Did someone say he did it?
this flim in the OP is just a small part of that particular show,the actuall p51 pilot who claims to have done this move in that battle was explaining it during the clip.
wether he did or not idk,i was not there,but it seems kinda ridiclous for everyone to claim it cant or wasnt done as no one playing this game was there either.
and i doubt any of us has flown a RL p51 in combat to try.
and again the p51 in this game is not as manuverable as the RL one was.
-
I'm wondering why Dogfights would simulate such a move. Did someone say he did it?
Shuf, where you been? I haven't been shot down by you lately :D.
Fan boys unleashed, it's unfortunate ...
that one guy harping on and on about the "hot Rod" modified 109 that was flying circles around him,
when what happened is he finally ran up against a good pilot in a competitive plane that had an advantage at the merge, and kept it.
i think there were at least two acts of desperation in that episode that were some how put forward as some sort of ACM, and some sort of examples of how the plane was great.
they should have focused on what made the plane great and left the anomalies alone, or at least presented them clearly as the last ditch acts of desperation by pilots/plane that had been totally out flown to the point of making their hail mary prayer of an evasive that they were.
there were good parts of that show, they should have expanded on that aspect iMO.
... again the p51 in this game is not as manuverable as the RL one was.
how did you come to that conclusion ?
-
how did you come to that conclusion ?
because ive seen them at airshows do things that they will not do in this game.
if you ever go to one,and theres a p51 with a pilot thats knows how to fly it
you will understand what im talking about.
-
because ive seen them at airshows do things that they will not do in this game.
Maybe they did things your unable to do. Probably the pilot.
-
Maybe they did things your unable to do. Probably the pilot.
yes,figured that was coming,let me put it this way then.
i saw them do things ive seen nobody in this game do!
-
you do realize that the planes at the air-shows are somewhat different, and operating around a very different set of priorities than the planes represented here were, don't you?
because ive seen them at airshows do things that they will not do in this game.
if you ever go to one,and theres a p51 with a pilot thats knows how to fly it
you will understand what im talking about.
-
yes,figured that was coming,let me put it this way then.
i saw them do things ive seen nobody in this game do!
Why not ask someone who has been up in a mustang. :D
-
you do realize that the planes at the air-shows are somewhat different, and operating around a very different set of priorities than the planes represented here were, don't you?
thats not completly true,some of those in airshows were the actuall p51s that flew in ww2
there are still alot of them around and were used after ww2 by many contries.
my point is none of us were there,none of us have flown an actuall 51 in combat
so how can we say it cant be done or the pilot in question was lying.
-
thats not completly ture,some of those in airshows were the actuall p51s that flew in ww2
there are still alot of them around and were used after ww2 by many contries.
my point is none of us were there,none of us have flown an actuall 51 in combat
so how can we say it cant be done or the pilot in question was lying.
well i won't argue that the game will be different, but i think if you look into those planes you will find that they have all gone through a lot of changes since their combat configurations, and will consequently be able to do things in their new configurations that were prohibited in the POH when they were ready for war.
-
thats not completly true,some of those in airshows were the actuall p51s that flew in ww2
there are still alot of them around and were used after ww2 by many contries.
my point is none of us were there,none of us have flown an actuall 51 in combat
so how can we say it cant be done or the pilot in question was lying.
Define 'actual combat'... we all know Hitech has been in 'mock combat' with a real P-51 and thats good enough for most of us.
AGAIN: The video on dogfights is a very poor visual of what the pilot described and not at all accurate.
-
AGAIN: The video on dogfights is a very poor visual of what the pilot described and not at all accurate.
yes,as described in my first post to this thread.
-
thats not completly true,some of those in airshows were the actuall p51s that flew in ww2
there are still alot of them around and were used after ww2 by many contries.
my point is none of us were there,none of us have flown an actuall 51 in combat
so how can we say it cant be done or the pilot in question was lying.
Uh danny, the airframes (everything but the engine and prop) are actual vintage P-51s that have been refurbished to some degree using either vintage replacement parts or modern replica parts. The engines and props are a different story.
Yeah you could do some wild things in a P-51 if you wanted to but nothing you would want to bet your life on in combat with someone shooting at you.
-
Uh danny, the airframes (everything but the engine and prop) are actual vintage P-51s that have been refurbished to some degree using either vintage replacement parts or modern replica parts. The engines and props are a different story.
Yeah you could do some wild things in a P-51 if you wanted to but nothing you would want to bet your life on in combat with someone shooting at you.
not to mention removing the guns, ammo, armor plates, usually the center tank, updating and or replacing the radios and avionics etc ...
no idea the loaded weight difference but it's gotta be thousands of pounds of benefit and a COG not compromised by the requirements of its mission.
-
AGAIN: The video on dogfights is a very poor visual of what the pilot described and not at all accurate.
I think this quote, in addition to the .gif posted in the linked thread on the first page, are excellent answers to the original question.
The rest of the conversation is also quite entertaining though.
-
yes,as described in my first post to this thread.
actually,in the whole show of that particular video the actual pilot that was in that fight in the p51 was on the show explaining that move as it went along,now im sure it was not quite as dramatic as that and was probly not as quite a sharp turn as that but the real 51s were capable of making such moves.but in our game the 51 is not as agile as were the real life ones,not even close.some of you guys are just get way to technical about stuff to comprehend the difference between real life and in game :salute
Not the way I read it Danny and technically speaking you were very much mistaken. Now if you have some 'empirical evidence' and not mere 'anecdotal evidence' then please share it because we 'P-51 fans' would love to have a better performing ride.
-
Sweet! I love a good "the P-51 is under-modeled" thread.
-
Sweet! I love a good "the P-51 is under-modeled" thread.
P-51 *is* undermodeled...but not because it can't execute F-22 maneuvers!!! :rofl
-
P-51 *is* undermodeled...but not because it can't execute F-22 maneuvers!!! :rofl
If you think it is undermodeld or overmodeled just produce factual eveidence and they will change it.
Not long a go one of the SAPP guys noted a weight descepency on the 38G and brought it to the attention of HiTech. Once they reviewed the information they added 600 lbs to the 38G. All you have to do is a little leg work to gather information from reputable reports and they will act.
We can all help make the models as accurate as possible. Just saying something and proping it up as fact wont get it. Get your factual information together to show an adjustment is needed.
-
:rolleyes:
We get it, your all talk. There's only so many ways you can say it.
No offense, but all I've seen from you is nothing but "talk" with very little, if anything, to 'back it up'.
ack-ack
-
No offense, but all I've seen from you is nothing but "talk" with very little, if anything, to 'back it up'.
ack-ack
:cry
-
If you think it is undermodeld or overmodeled just produce factual eveidence and they will change it.
Not long a go one of the SAPP guys noted a weight descepency on the 38G and brought it to the attention of HiTech. Once they reviewed the information they added 600 lbs to the 38G. All you have to do is a little leg work to gather information from reputable reports and they will act.
We can all help make the models as accurate as possible. Just saying something and proping it up as fact wont get it. Get your factual information together to show an adjustment is needed.
Why don't you just look up many of Widewing's fine posts about the results of side-by-side turning tests and then compare reality with the results of such tests in AHII? It will amuse me to see whether or not you decide to accuse someone of *his* experiences of being a crank. Same discrepancy seems to exist with the Ki-61's reported turn performance vs. in-game performance btw, so it is not an isolated bugaboo. The Mustang is not even close to being my favorite aircraft, but when test pilots report it turning a smaller circle than the P-47, Typhoon, and Tempest and the exact opposite phenomenon occurs in AHII, it is worth a look. Also, it is evident that the P-51D is running at '44 levels of performance. This is not inaccurate per se, but the fairness can be questioned considering it is competing in the MA with aircraft from the last 5 minutes or so of the war.
-
which pony d is it?
in game ?
-
Why don't you just look up many of Widewing's fine posts about the results of side-by-side turning tests and then compare reality with the results of such tests in AHII? It will amuse me to see whether or not you decide to accuse someone of *his* experiences of being a crank. Same discrepancy seems to exist with the Ki-61's reported turn performance vs. in-game performance btw, so it is not an isolated bugaboo. The Mustang is not even close to being my favorite aircraft, but when test pilots report it turning a smaller circle than the P-47, Typhoon, and Tempest and the exact opposite phenomenon occurs in AHII, it is worth a look. Also, it is evident that the P-51D is running at '44 levels of performance. This is not inaccurate per se, but the fairness can be questioned considering it is competing in the MA with aircraft from the last 5 minutes or so of the war.
Read my post..... take it to HiTech. I believe you'll find alot of Widewings tests are done in AHII. If your so sure take it to them. Posting here about it just makes you look bad.
-
Not the way I read it Danny and technically speaking you were very much mistaken. Now if you have some 'empirical evidence' and not mere 'anecdotal evidence' then please share it because we 'P-51 fans' would love to have a better performing ride.
the evidence is in our history,look it up,you do know how right?
-
Danny you are an argument looking for a place to happen and thats all.
Have a nice day.
-
Danny you are an argument looking for a place to happen and thats all.
Have a nice day.
:noid
-
Read my post..... take it to HiTech. I believe you'll find alot of Widewings tests are done in AHII. If your so sure take it to them. Posting here about it just makes you look bad.
The issue has already been discussed. It will or will not be acted upon.
But if you are so interested in reading one good example:
One of the problems associated with modeling an aircraft, specifically a WWII fighter, is that there exists no real world quantitative testing that measured turning ability with flaps fully down. I have never seen any and I'll wager no one else has either. It was something that was not tested. Therefore, HTC has to make decisions based upon what they do know. No doubt, it's an imperfect art.
Likewise, I have not any testing of minimal turn radius clean. Most testing was done on a comparison basis.
There is flight testing of a P-51 (Allison) comparing maneuverability to the P-39D, P-40F (Merlin powered), P-38F and P-47C. We know the takeoff weight of the this P-51, 8,443 lb. We don't know how much of its 140 gallons was burned off prior to the actual "dog fights", but we can assume that it was proportional to the others. Note that this P-51 shares the same basic air frame with P-51B, including the wing and tail appendages, except that the rudder trim was changed and rigged as an anti-balance tab. This Allison P-51 is lighter by 440 lb in basic weight.
The text from the test describes the comparison as follows:
b. Maneuverability. The subject aircraft was flown in "mock" combat against the P-38F, P-39D, P-40F, P-47B, and the Mitsubishi "00" type of aircraft.
c. The following results were obtained:
(1) The subject aircraft was found to be superior in speed of the Mitsubishi "00", P-39D, P-47F at all altitudes and the P-47B and P-38F up to fifteen-thousand (15,000) feet.
(2) The subject aircraft was found to be superior in rate of climb to the P-39D, P-40F, and the P-47B up to fifteen-thousand (15,000) feet.
(3) The acceleration in dives and the maximum permissible diving speed of the subject aircraft is superior to all types tested.
(4) The turning characteristics of the subject aircraft are substantially the same as the P-40F and the P-39D. None of these appears to have any definite superior turning characteristics.
(5) In close "dog fighting" the subject aircraft has the very decided advantage of being able to engage or break off combat at will. However, if neither airplane attempts to leave the combat, the P-40F is considered to have a slight advantage.
Let's look at our P-51B... The minimum takeoff weight that can be produced in the game is 8,213 lb. This is obtained by shooting out all of the ammunition prior to takeoff. This weight is substantially less than the takeoff weight of the P51 in the above test. Even if the that P-51 had burned off 40 gallons of its fuel, it would weigh in at 8,195 lb, very close to the 8,213 lb for a light P-51B.
Let's compare our P-40E to the P-40F. Like the P-51B, this P-40 was fitted with a Merlin. This installation added nearly 400 lb to the airframe. So, if we compare the P-51B to the P-40E, we need to allow for an additional 400 lb of weight for the P-40E. Takeoff weight for a fully loaded P-40F is 8,678 lb. Let's reduce that by 40 gallons of gas. That comes out to 8,430 lb. With that figure in mind, I'll configure the P-40E to that weight. To get this, I load 75% internal fuel and a drop tank. I then have to shoot out a little ammo to get down to 8,430 lb. The drop tank adds drag, so the numbers will be skewed to reflect that.
With both fighters configured, I then do a minimum turn radius test, both clean and with full flaps.
So, in "close dog fighting", is the P-51B only "slightly" inferior to the P-40E at the weights defined above?
Minimum turn radius clean...
P-40E: 743.5 feet
P-51B: 770.6 feet
Minimum turn radius full flaps...
P-40E: 566.4 feet
P-51B: 601.1 feet
Remember now, the P-40E has 75% fuel and a 75 gallon drop tank, vs a P-51B with 25% fuel and no ammo.
The ratio between clean and full flaps is about the same between them.
However, I don't see this as a "slight" difference. It's roughly the same as the difference between a SpitV and a SpitIX, which is much more than "slight".
Moreover, the fact that a clean A-20G easily out-turns a clean P-51B should create a pause for thought, agree?
My regards,
Widewing
-
Personally I'm not interested in the pony. I do think it is a very fine bird. I have flown it in the past and it'll turn fight very well. I always preferred the B.
My intent posting was to push you to act upon your knowledge of the pony to correct modeling for the better or worse of the bird in AH. No matter if it helps or hinders the plane I think all should be modeled as close as possible to the real birds.
I'm sure HiTech feels the same and is open to all info you can muster.
-
allison ponies would turn different than merlin powered aircraft so the test doesn't really show anything interesting at all.
what is interesting is the casual glazing over why there is no full flap deployment maneuver testing done, relative to why players here are curious about the performance of an aircraft in that configuration.
since you are looking for lift and speed for turn performance it seems to me that any flap setting higher than your "normal" (i.e. not short take off settings) take off flap setting is likely to be adding more drag than the added lift would be worth.
along with all the other problems you should encounter while trying to fight so close to your minimum stall speed.
the problem/question is not ...
"why my plane doesn't turn better at full flaps"
it is ...
"why can i do all this silly stuff when my plane is so dirty, this can't be correct"
or rather that should be the burning question in peoples minds ...
imo.
+S+
t
-
I saw the show and I don't recall the pilot saying that he could duplicate the maneuver himself.
-
allison ponies would turn different than merlin powered aircraft so the test doesn't really show anything interesting at all.
It is the same airframe. In the test shown WW carefully calibrated the weight of the P-51B to that of a the P-51A. Thus a perfect test. Note that because the P-40E's weight was brought up to P-40F levels by use of a drop tank hanging in the breeze, the turn performance of the Warhawk should be worse relative the P-51 than in the real world test, not better.
Thorsim, aren't you tired of harping on the full flaps thing yet? Flaps do what they are supposed to do in AHII...create lift and drag. As far as I know, every plane in the game gets its best sustained turn rate at 0, 1, or at most 2 notches of flaps, turn rate falling off with more flap deployment. Full flaps are useful for basically one thing, when you need to fly as slowly as possible. Like when landing. Otherwise, they are a hindrance. Your idea that it should be impossible to maneuver with them deployed though...completely without basis.
-
It is the same airframe. In the test shown WW carefully calibrated the weight of the P-51B to that of a the P-51A. Thus a perfect test. Note that because the P-40E's weight was brought up to P-40F levels by use of a drop tank hanging in the breeze, the turn performance of the Warhawk should be worse relative the P-51 than in the real world test, not better.
Thorsim, aren't you tired of harping on the full flaps thing yet? Flaps do what they are supposed to do in AHII...create lift and drag. As far as I know, every plane in the game gets its best sustained turn rate at 0, 1, or at most 2 notches of flaps, turn rate falling off with more flap deployment. Full flaps are useful for basically one thing, when you need to fly as slowly as possible. Like when landing. Otherwise, they are a hindrance. Your idea that it should be impossible to maneuver with them deployed though...completely without basis.
same airframe (for the B maybe) different engines, weights added, weight added at different places which means different COG or more weight to re balance, different power loading ...
remember you are talking about the edges of the envelope which means little problems may become very prominent.
the links below show what happens with tons of BHP big props and lots of flaps at low altitudes ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q)
sorry about these for the associated losses but this is what often happens when a surprise addition of power and it's associated prop torque takes over at low speeds ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related)
and that is why they don't test for "max maneuverability" at low speed low alt with flaps fully deployed ...
full flaps and dogfighting very very bad in the real world "." it should be much more like that here,
as it is now pilots are operating well away from the know advantages of their aircraft because there are far too few represented consequences for such silliness.
i don't think i can be more clear on this topic ...
no offense
+S+
t
-
full flaps and dogfighting very very bad in the real world "." it should be much more like that here,
as it is now pilots are operating well away from the know advantages of their aircraft because there are far too few represented consequences for such silliness.
It is a very bad idea here but there are a lot more people willing to fly that way also.
-
It is a very bad idea here but there are a lot more people willing to fly that way also.
well if the game represented the reasons why it is a bad idea more, then things would probably change in that regard ...
no offense
+S+
t
-
well if the game represented the reasons why it is a bad idea more, then things would probably change in that regard ...
You mean if people really died? what else could you possibly mean.......
Give it up thor. it is a game. That is all it is. All it should be. Unless you are willing to die playing a game.....go right ahead, but I will stay well clear of you if you understand my meaning.
-
You mean if people really died? what else could you possibly mean.......
Give it up thor. it is a game. That is all it is. All it should be. Unless you are willing to die playing a game.....go right ahead, but I will stay well clear of you if you understand my meaning.
no i mean planes crashed, a lot.
i suspect if planes crashed here a lot more then there would a lot fewer legitimate complaints about the flaps in AH. why should i give it up?
-
no i mean planes crashed, a lot.
i suspect if planes crashed here a lot more then there would a lot fewer legitimate complaints about the flaps in AH. why should i give it up?
Because you missed Yeager's point completely. We get to do more then real life because we can risk more then real life without really dying.
If I was really going to die, you bet I wouldn't be hanging out in a 38G on the deck with the flaps out. The consequences of getting that low and slow could be permanent. But since I get a new cartoon airplane every time, taking my 38G into that situation is for the challenge of getting the most out of it, not life or death.
Quoting 'Twelve to One" the 5th AF fighter pilot's 'bible'. Two real 80th Headhunters
Allen Hill, pilot of "Hills Angels" in the 80th FS
"In cases where you are really latched, it doesn't matter much what you do, but do something and do it violently"
Cy Homer of the 80th
"When caught just above the tree tops or water at slow speed, you can only hope to throw his aim off by jerking and skidding, at the same time striving for altitude. Drop full flaps if neccessary--anything to make him overshoot."
"If you find your tail is dirty, then it is time to get violent at the controls"
I think you'd find, if you flew a scenario that folks like myself fly it differently as one life does matter. But flying 'safe' in the MA seems just silly to me. I want to see how far I can take it, even if it means losing, as I am apt to do more often then not :)
-
below show what happens with tons of BHP big props and lots of flaps at low altitudes ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q)
sorry about these for the associated losses but this is what often happens when a surprise addition of power and it's associated prop torque takes over at low speeds ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related)
No they don't. With the exception of the Corsair that rolled off to the left short of the deck the Corsair crashes were just bad landings...nothing to do with torque or P-factor. Same for the vid of the Mustangs crashing at Oshkosh. Did you happen to notice in the Mustang crash that it rolled to the right which is against engine torque?
-
My favorite 'flaps' story. As it was much the same as Cy Homer was talking about, it seems to fit. Down low, in a spot, anything goes. Oh and the 500 pounders were still on the 38 :aok
Lt. Royal Madden from the 370th FG, 9th AF, July 31, 1944
“Approximately 15 Me 109s came down on Blue Flight and we broke left. I then made a vertical right turn and observed Blue Two below and close and Blue Four was ahead and slightly above me. I glanced behind me and saw four Me 109s closing on my tail fast and within range so I broke left and down in a Split S. I used flaps to get out and pulled up and to the left. I then noticed a single Me 109 on my tail and hit the deck in a sharp spiral.
We seemed to be the only two planes around so we proceeded to mix it up in a good old-fashioned dogfight at about 1000 feet. This boy was good and he had me plenty worried as he sat on my tail for about five minutes, but I managed to keep him from getting any deflection. I was using maneuvering flaps often and finally got inside of him. I gave him a short burst at 60 degrees, but saw I was slightly short so I took about 2 radii lead at about 150 yards and gave him a good long burst. There were strikes on the cockpit and all over the ship and the canopy came off. He rolled over on his back and seemed out of control so I closed in and was about to give him a burst at 0 deflection when he bailed out at 800 feet.
Having lost the squadron I hit the deck for home. Upon landing I learned that my two 500 pound bombs had not released when I had tried to jettison them upon being jumped. As a result I carried them throughout the fight.”
-
My favorite 'flaps' story. As it was much the same as Cy Homer was talking about, it seems to fit. Down low, in a spot, anything goes. Oh and the 500 pounders were still on the 38 :aok
Lt. Royal Madden from the 370th FG, 9th AF, July 31, 1944
“Approximately 15 Me 109s came down on Blue Flight and we broke left. I then made a vertical right turn and observed Blue Two below and close and Blue Four was ahead and slightly above me. I glanced behind me and saw four Me 109s closing on my tail fast and within range so I broke left and down in a Split S. I used flaps to get out and pulled up and to the left. I then noticed a single Me 109 on my tail and hit the deck in a sharp spiral.
We seemed to be the only two planes around so we proceeded to mix it up in a good old-fashioned dogfight at about 1000 feet. This boy was good and he had me plenty worried as he sat on my tail for about five minutes, but I managed to keep him from getting any deflection. I was using maneuvering flaps often and finally got inside of him. I gave him a short burst at 60 degrees, but saw I was slightly short so I took about 2 radii lead at about 150 yards and gave him a good long burst. There were strikes on the cockpit and all over the ship and the canopy came off. He rolled over on his back and seemed out of control so I closed in and was about to give him a burst at 0 deflection when he bailed out at 800 feet.
Having lost the squadron I hit the deck for home. Upon landing I learned that my two 500 pound bombs had not released when I had tried to jettison them upon being jumped. As a result I carried them throughout the fight.”
I wonder if it's all that noticeable when the bombs are jettisoned? I can see when in the heat of battle how one wouldn't notice.
-
No they don't. With the exception of the Corsair that rolled off to the left short of the deck
that is an exact example of my point that you just previously said wasn't ...
nothing to do with torque or P-factor. Same for the vid of the Mustangs crashing at Oshkosh. Did you happen to notice in the Mustang crash that it rolled to the right which is against engine torque?
all the rest are examples of poor maneuverability and controllability, lack of options in a very flap extended "dirty" airframe. all the bad landings were unable to be corrected or successfully aborted because of the pilots lack of alternatives in that extreme flap deployment configuration at low speeds ...
(the very condition the same planes excel at in AH)
did you notice col that the prop is what hit the other plane?
so it was the force from the prop impact that caused the roll on the pony, it may not have been the normal engine torque, but it was still torque from the prop that caused the roll he was unable to correct.
if you believe i am mistaken col why don't you go ahead and feel free to describe the specific aerodynamic forces acting on the pony that you think caused the crash, after all he was still flying after the prop impact was he not?
i am not saying it couldn't be done, but it should clearly be a bad choice. the way it is in the game is such that there are very few consequences. the situation is so skewed that many players are choosing to move away from the altitude and speed advantages they have in a fight because they prefer the situation where they should be at an extreme disadvantage. guys are consistently "jamming on the breaks" in their escorts to enter a turn fight against a historically dominant turn fighter because the flaps the way they are IN THE GAME allow them to do that.
no offense
+S+
t
-
guppy and yeager what you fail to see in my point is that if the virtual consequences were more in line with TRW the reluctance in game would also mirror the situation in real life.
no you shouldn't die in the real world for doing something stupid in a video game.
but that doesn't mean you should be rewarded for being stupid in the video game where the same decision in the real world would likely kill you, does it?
especially in a game that "mirrors" the real world ...
right?
no offense
+S+
t
-
same airframe (for the B maybe) different engines, weights added, weight added at different places which means different COG or more weight to re balance, different power loading ...
A silly objection. The only difference significant between a P-51A and a P-51B being tested at the same weight is the additional horsepower of the B. More power in same airframe, weighted to produce the same wingloading will produce better performance, not worse. You should know this, but then again you're the same fellow who spoke blithely of the ill effects of the P-38's "torque"...
According to the Hitech, torque effects are modeled fully and correctly in AHII. And if you don't think being at low-speed high AoA high power in AHII in a single-engine bird cannot produce a violent departure, you haven't flown enough.
same airframe (for the B maybe) different engines, weights added, weight added at different places which means different COG or more weight to re balance, different power loading ...
remember you are talking about the edges of the envelope which means little problems may become very prominent.
the links below show what happens with tons of BHP big props and lots of flaps at low altitudes ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q)
sorry about these for the associated losses but this is what often happens when a surprise addition of power and it's associated prop torque takes over at low speeds ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I0J3hhj4X8&feature=related)
and that is why they don't test for "max maneuverability" at low speed low alt with flaps fully deployed ...
full flaps and dogfighting very very bad in the real world "." it should be much more like that here,
as it is now pilots are operating well away from the know advantages of their aircraft because there are far too few represented consequences for such silliness.
i don't think i can be more clear on this topic ...
no offense
+S+
t
-
all the rest are examples of poor maneuverability and controllability, lack of options in a very flap extended "dirty" airframe.
Once again, if you have not noticed a decay in maneuverability at low airspeeds with all the flaps hanging out in AHII, then you have not flown the game.
-
A silly objection. The only difference significant between a P-51A and a P-51B being tested at the same weight is the additional horsepower of the B. More power in same airframe, weighted to produce the same wingloading will produce better performance, not worse. You should know this, but then again you're the same fellow who spoke blithely of the ill effects of the P-38's "torque"...
According to the Hitech, torque effects are modeled fully and correctly in AHII. And if you don't think being at low-speed high AoA high power in AHII in a single-engine bird cannot produce a violent departure, you haven't flown enough.
no that was not my objection about the 38 ...
so you are saying that the test as done are not conclusive to your assumption? cuz that is what i said ...
+S+
t
-
guppy and yeager what you fail to see in my point is that if the virtual consequences were more in line with TRW the reluctance in game would also mirror the situation in real life.
Ok, Im going to continue here: What is TRW and what sort of consequences and reluctance are you talking about?
-
Once again, if you have not noticed a decay in maneuverability at low airspeeds with all the flaps hanging out in AHII, then you have not flown the game.
It also appears that thorsim is automatically assuming that everyone that uses flaps just leave them out regardless of the consequences. While that may be true of newer and inexperienced players, you will rarely see a veteran or more experienced player using flaps in such a way.
Speaking only for myself, my flaps are only deployed when needed and as soon as I'm done, I raise them and never leave them hanging out. You will never see my flying with full flaps left out, for instance if I need full flaps in a rolling scissors situation, I deploy them for when I need them and then immediately rectract them afterwards. You'll find others that fly 'flap dependent' planes using flaps the same way.
ack-ack
-
My favorite 'flaps' story. As it was much the same as Cy Homer was talking about, it seems to fit. Down low, in a spot, anything goes. Oh and the 500 pounders were still on the 38 :aok
Lt. Royal Madden from the 370th FG, 9th AF, July 31, 1944
“Approximately 15 Me 109s came down on Blue Flight and we broke left. I then made a vertical right turn and observed Blue Two below and close and Blue Four was ahead and slightly above me. I glanced behind me and saw four Me 109s closing on my tail fast and within range so I broke left and down in a Split S. I used flaps to get out and pulled up and to the left. I then noticed a single Me 109 on my tail and hit the deck in a sharp spiral.
We seemed to be the only two planes around so we proceeded to mix it up in a good old-fashioned dogfight at about 1000 feet. This boy was good and he had me plenty worried as he sat on my tail for about five minutes, but I managed to keep him from getting any deflection. I was using maneuvering flaps often and finally got inside of him. I gave him a short burst at 60 degrees, but saw I was slightly short so I took about 2 radii lead at about 150 yards and gave him a good long burst. There were strikes on the cockpit and all over the ship and the canopy came off. He rolled over on his back and seemed out of control so I closed in and was about to give him a burst at 0 deflection when he bailed out at 800 feet.
Having lost the squadron I hit the deck for home. Upon landing I learned that my two 500 pound bombs had not released when I had tried to jettison them upon being jumped. As a result I carried them throughout the fight.”
I posted this AAR in another thread about flaps when someone challenged to find anything that shows real pilots using flaps in the way we do in AH. Of course, it was ignored by the person that asked for the proof. Why am I not surprised?
ack-ack
-
Ok, Im going to continue here: What is TRW and what sort of consequences and reluctance are you talking about?
The Real World (i.e. some place totally unfamiliar to some of us) which is very thankfully difficult to include in a video game.
-
TRW = the real world ...
"your" applies in general to pilots nor specific to anyone.
if your chances of success outside your inherent envelope were not so adjusted in your planes by the way the flaps are represented in AH, then the instances of players making the decision to leave the respective inherent envelopes of their flap adjustable plane to fight inside the advantage envelope of another players superior maneuvering plane would be reduced. probably in direct proportion to the lack of success that one would then expect to achieve fighting outside their envelope vs a plane that is inside its envelope.
being able to "fly" and being able to "fight" are dependent on very different levels of controllability in the real world. imo this is not very well represented in the game.
-
lol
I couldnt fly without the last two notches of flaps...
:aok
-
i do not see him having deployed extreme deflections in this AAR therefore it is off the point and not worthy of reply.
no offense
+S+
t
I posted this AAR in another thread about flaps when someone challenged to find anything that shows real pilots using flaps in the way we do in AH. Of course, it was ignored by the person that asked for the proof. Why am I not surprised?
ack-ack
-
thorsim has completely derailed the thread now and turned it into another of his 'anti-flap' discussions.
-
what does the POS say about low full flaps and being inverted as in a rolling scissor ...
what would a real pilot say about that?
It also appears that thorsim is automatically assuming that everyone that uses flaps just leave them out regardless of the consequences. While that may be true of newer and inexperienced players, you will rarely see a veteran or more experienced player using flaps in such a way.
Speaking only for myself, my flaps are only deployed when needed and as soon as I'm done, I raise them and never leave them hanging out. You will never see my flying with full flaps left out, for instance if I need full flaps in a rolling scissors situation, I deploy them for when I need them and then immediately rectract them afterwards. You'll find others that fly 'flap dependent' planes using flaps the same way.
ack-ack
-
thorsim has completely derailed the thread now and turned it into another of his 'anti-flap' discussions.
Yeah, I bet he has nightmares about the "Flap Boogieman" coming to get him as he sleeps. Makes one wonder if he really knows what he's talking about because it sure doesn't sound like it from my end.
ack-ack
-
no actually it was B&Z ...
more accurately a quote from wildewing in an attempt to show why the pony was under modeled that introduced flaps into this discussion.
no offense
+S+
t
thorsim has completely derailed the thread now and turned it into another of his 'anti-flap' discussions.
-
Yeah, I bet he has nightmares about the "Flap Boogieman" coming to get him as he sleeps. Makes one wonder if he really knows what he's talking about because it sure doesn't sound like it from my end.
ack-ack
it's ok i understand how the thought of the removal of entitlements can be frightening ...
-
it's ok i understand how the thought of the removal of entitlements can be frightening ...
Why would it be frightening since the way you claim flaps are used in game is not the way I use them at all?
Now for the trademark brutal honesty of Ack-Ack...
It's starting to sound more and more that you're getting your arse handed back to by those of us that fly "flap adjustable planes" and you're looking for a way to try and level the playing field so you can be competitive. Don't know about you, but trying to pork the flaps (when there is nothing wrong with them) or trying to force people to use them how you think should be used is not the way to go about and improving one's skill.
Just sayin'
ack-ack
-
guppy and yeager what you fail to see in my point is that if the virtual consequences were more in line with TRW the reluctance in game would also mirror the situation in real life.
no you shouldn't die in the real world for doing something stupid in a video game.
but that doesn't mean you should be rewarded for being stupid in the video game where the same decision in the real world would likely kill you, does it?
especially in a game that "mirrors" the real world ...
right?
no offense
+S+
t
It would not likely kill you with the thousands of hours we have. There is a better chance IF someone really good comes along that you may die. I fight low and slow in my 38J all the time... I kill more than I die.
-
actually you are incorrect again i do just fine vs. the flap deployment planes in general ...
but then you will find that how i am doing does not have much bearing on what is imo correct or incorrect in the game, it is the people who are extensively using the flaps in ways that would kill them in the real world who's success rate would change if the flaps were more realistic.
for example i believe the dive flap should bleed e in the game the way it did in the real world, that would only serve to improve the ability for the 38 to slow down, it would not make it "slower" as we discussed at length in another thread.
conversely i have not demanded attention be taken to bring the p40s flaps back in line with it's POS, as that is against my belief that such things are not about the POS but rather the physics of flight.
in no case will you find me advocating something i believe to be wrong just because it makes my time in the game more difficult. i find these games to be too easy in general, however when i see people arguing that they should have a very good chance in a 38 vs. a well flown spitfire in an maneuver fight it just imo contributes to an overall emerson problem that happens when things are tweaked to the point of being way beyond reality.
i will kill and live in whatever pice of crap you want to put me in because i stick to the envelopes of the planes. when the envelopes are determined by fairie tales, well then i tend to express frustration.
no offense
+S+
t
Why would it be frightening since the way you claim flaps are used in game is not the way I use them at all?
Now for the trademark brutal honesty of Ack-Ack...
It's starting to sound more and more that you're getting your arse handed back to by those of us that fly "flap adjustable planes" and you're looking for a way to try and level the playing field so you can be competitive. Don't know about you, but trying to pork the flaps (when there is nothing wrong with them) or trying to force people to use them how you think should be used is not the way to go about and improving one's skill.
Just sayin'
ack-ack
-
AHII too easy? Now I know you havent flown this game much.
-
wow, this is just nuts. I completely lost now :lol
-
AHII too easy? Now I know you havent flown this game much.
just a different level of expectations i guess ...
some of us grew up in tougher neighborhoods than others ...
no offense
++S++
t
-
Thats hilarious since I dont believe you have grown up at all! Here. Enjoy some real aerobatics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3dPGEKGx9Y&feature=PlayList&p=27CBCF67B65DF865&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=28
-
I got five buck thorsim could not own the ground underneath him....
Any takers?
Strip
-
Thats hilarious since I dont believe you have grown up at all! Here. Enjoy some real aerobatics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3dPGEKGx9Y&feature=PlayList&p=27CBCF67B65DF865&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=28
Would like to see him doing a 360 degrees left turn doing a roll TO THE RIGHT... :x
As described in the book "Conquest of lines and simetry" , by Duane Cole :aok
Whe I read it got a knot in my head... And I´ve seen it done in real life in Red Bull Air Races in Rio.
Mutley
-
I have seen Patty Wagstaff and a few others do it and its pretty common anymore.
I have been thinking about it for days now and I cant come up with a reason that flaps would cause any kind of abrupt interruption of flight except at stall speed which would be lower anyway because of flaps being deployed. I kept hoping he would mention some reason for his way of thinking but in the end it sounds more like stubborn unwillingness to admit having been mistaken about it.
I think I have every flight sim out for PC and AHII is about the hardest one so this latest comment was just bluff and brashness.
-
actually you are incorrect again i do just fine vs. the flap deployment planes in general ...
but then you will find that how i am doing does not have much bearing on what is imo correct or incorrect in the game, it is the people who are extensively using the flaps in ways that would kill them in the real world who's success rate would change if the flaps were more realistic.
You apparently have some odd ideas about flaps. They increase a wing's lift and drag. They do not make an aircraft into a deathtrap that departs at the slightest control input. It would make little sense to deploy them prior to *landing* if that were the case.
for example i believe the dive flap should bleed e in the game the way it did in the real world, that would only serve to improve the ability for the 38 to slow down, it would not make it "slower" as we discussed at length in another thread.
This is a non-issue. If the very slight drag that the 38L's dive flaps would cause were modeled, it would do nothing but slightly improve the dive-flap's usefulness. I assure you, true dive brakes that could be used for rapid decleration would be a very welcome addition to any fighter plane in AHII.
i find these games to be too easy in general,
:rofl Oh dear, are you one of those people who think "harder=more realistic" in a flight sim? Haven't you ever heard that the few vets who've tried these sims tend to be of the opinion that it is harder than flying the real thing?
however when i see people arguing that they should have a very good chance in a 38 vs. a well flown spitfire in an maneuver fight it just imo contributes to an overall emerson problem that happens when things are tweaked to the point of being way beyond reality.
And here we come to what is basically an expression of ignorance with nothing to back it up. There is no implicit reason why the 38 should *not* stand a good chance in a fight with the Spitfire. The 38 was known as a good-turning airplane, as the combat reports against 109s demonstrate. Further, the 38J/Lin AHII, does not match the Spitfire in either sustained rate or radius of turn. Its advantage is having no net torque at low speed/high power, which is a direct result of being a counter-rotating twin vrs. a single engine. All that being said, if you are in a SpitIX/VIII/XVI and loose a co-e fight with a 38, it will be because you were out-flown, not because of the airplane was superior.
-
actually you are incorrect again i do just fine vs. the flap deployment planes in general ...
but then you will find that how i am doing does not have much bearing on what is imo correct or incorrect in the game, it is the people who are extensively using the flaps in ways that would kill them in the real world who's success rate would change if the flaps were more realistic.
you have yet so show a single example how the flaps are incorrectly modeled for any plane in the game. However, it does appear that you want to change player flying behavior by changing the flap modeling in game.
for example i believe the dive flap should bleed e in the game the way it did in the real world, that would only serve to improve the ability for the 38 to slow down, it would not make it "slower" as we discussed at length in another thread.
Again, you clearly show that you don't know how the dive flaps in the P-38 worked. They were not speed brakes and did not act as such when deployed. Yes, they did add drag to the plane but it was not significant enough to act as any sort of speed/air brake and P-38 pilots did not use the dive flaps to slow them down. The most significant loss of energy when using the dive flaps was the energy lost when the nose pitched up and not the dive flaps themselves.
Please show any sort of data that proves what you're saying. You didn't in the last thread and I seriously doubt you'll be able to provide any this time around.
in no case will you find me advocating something i believe to be wrong just because it makes my time in the game more difficult. i find these games to be too easy in general, however when i see people arguing that they should have a very good chance in a 38 vs. a well flown spitfire in an maneuver fight it just imo contributes to an overall emerson problem that happens when things are tweaked to the point of being way beyond reality.
Actually, it depends on the situation in a P-38 vs. Spitfire fight and the type of Spitfire a P-38 is fighting against. The Spitfire is deadliest at the medium speed ranges and no matter how good you are in the P-38, the P-38 is going to get chewed up if it fights the Spitfire at that speed range, regardless of the skill level of the Spitfire pilot.
The reason why a lot of us more experienced P-38 drivers in game are able to be successful against the various types of Spitfires is that we don't fight the Spitfire's game. You won't see me engage in a turn fight with a Spitfire at mediums speeds, because it's suicide. However, I will engage one in a high speed turn fight (above 300mph IAS) where I do have the slight edge and keep the fight in the vertical using vertical turns or if things are desperate try and force the fight at very low to stall speeds, where I can take advantage of my zero torque, lower stall speed and better low speed handling, in cases like that, I'll use the Cloverleaf maneuver. That maneuver allows me to take advantage of my low stall speed, zero torque and better low speed handling but its definitely not a maneuver that is 100% successful.
You're just want the flight models changed so you can force players to fly how you want them to.
i will kill and live in whatever pice of crap you want to put me in because i stick to the envelopes of the planes. when the envelopes are determined by fairie tales, well then i tend to express frustration.
no offense
+S+
t
The above just proves again you're trying to change the flight model to change player flying behavior without showing there is anything wrong with the flight model to begin with. Just another variation of "I want you to fly my way!" cries that pollute these forums.
ack-ack
-
guppy and yeager what you fail to see in my point is that if the virtual consequences were more in line with TRW the reluctance in game would also mirror the situation in real life.
no you shouldn't die in the real world for doing something stupid in a video game.
but that doesn't mean you should be rewarded for being stupid in the video game where the same decision in the real world would likely kill you, does it?
especially in a game that "mirrors" the real world ...
right?
no offense
+S+
t
There is nothing real world about this. We aren't assigned airplanes. We don't fly missions we don't want to. You aren't flying Val's off Rabaul for example.
You ignored the quote from Cy Homer, real life 38 Ace about going full flaps if you have to, if it means clearing your tail and forcing an overshoot.
Again, given one life and done in this game, I'd play it alot differently. As I mentioned, in a scenario with one life, I'm not going to put myself in a spot with everything hanging out, unless it's as a last resort to survive. Kinda real life thinking based on Cy Homer's quote. When we flew DGS at 30K you can bet the 38 guys weren't 'flapping' it in the fight. It was keep the speed up, think ahead of the fight, and don't do something dumb. One life was it. Interestingly enough, the one fight I got into that went to the deck I did use the flaps, and it 'saved' my cartoon one life, as my wingman was able to finally get the guy who shot me full of holes,.
The MA allows me to test my cartoon flying skills against other cartoon pilots. Why would I not use every tool at my disposal in a knock down, drag out fight on the deck? And with the limited time I get to play, I'll be damned if I'm going to fly the MA like it's real life as I don't have time to waste setting every fight up in my favor, nor would I want to. That's boring
That was my point in quoting the 9thAF 38 driver. They got bounced, were outnumbered and did whatever they had to. He used flaps often and it saved his life for real. Whether or not he went full flaps is beside the point. He used the tools he had to win the fight.
You've shown me nothing to say the flight model is out of kilter here or that flap use is wrong. We aren't flying for real with real life consequences. We're flying for fun, and the challenge of cartoon air combat
-
all the rest are examples of poor maneuverability and controllability,
No, they're examples of poorly flown approaches or poor technique once over the deck. The limitations YOU think exist due to flap extension make folks that have actually flown airplanes think WTF!? Where do you come up with this stuff? Do you do drugs? Do you have an alcohol problem? You have absolutely no flying experience yet continually, historically argue with people who do have the experience. Just because you don't understand doesn't mean it isn't true.
did you notice col that the prop is what hit the other plane?.........so it was the force from the prop impact that caused the roll on the pony, it may not have been the normal engine torque, but it was still torque from the prop that caused the roll he was unable to correct.
Looked more like it was the right wing that hit the rudder of the lead Mustang..hence the yaw to the right. Yaw causes roll. And the prop hitting the airplane is still going to cause a roll to the left. Torque doesn't care what the prop is acting against...air or aluminum...it's going to roll left from torque.
-
seems to me col you have stated flaps are "wrong" in other similar games as well ...
you can all argue that almost doubling you drag flying very near you stall speeds and then maneuvering hard is perfectly fine if you want, but the all mighty POHs say different don't they ...
as far as why things should be sketchy i will ask you experts some questions ...
what is the difference between your stall speeds and your last two highest deflection deployment speeds ...
my looking for the pony gives you about 90 mph to play with between stall speed and 40 degrees of flaps.
if you are at max flap deployment that buffer is only 60 mph ...
you are already slow, your drag should be between 150% -200% of normal, you have no more BHP so your ability to accelerate, climb, turn sharply, roll (imagine your inverted AOA to maintain level flight) or maneuver in any direction in any axis is significantly reduced ...
all of that should make doing all those things very difficult to accomplish with only 60-90 mph as a buffer between success and stall ...
how much bank or climb or skid does it take to bleed 60 mph?
i still have seen no accounts of high flap deflection combats from all you historians, something that is common in these games ...
ACM in these extremely deployed states seems to me to be a pretty poor decision.
one that should have dire consequences, even if they are just virtual.
so here i am discussing the "weather" with people who can not be convinced of anything until we get the paper from the news stand, even after having to walk three blocks outside in the weather to get there.
another "brakes don't slow you down AHBBS moment" :rofl
In our game, to really succeed in some knock-down scissors fights you have to be prepared to drop full flaps ...
i again invite any of you to post opposing videos or accounts showing planes doing acrobatics with full flap deployment and how perfectly easy and probable it is for this kind of ACM to be so common in the game.
No, they're examples of poorly flown approaches or poor technique once over the deck. The limitations YOU think exist due to flap extension make folks that have actually flown airplanes think WTF!? Where do you come up with this stuff? Do you do drugs? Do you have an alcohol problem? You have absolutely no flying experience yet continually, historically argue with people who do have the experience. Just because you don't understand doesn't mean it isn't true.
so the lack of controllability in that state has nothing to do with anything, they all just sucked ...
do you always resort to personal attacks when you are having difficulty in a discussion?
very very nice on both accounts col ...
+S+
t
-
i again invite any of you to post opposing videos or accounts showing planes doing acrobatics with full flap deployment and how perfectly easy and probable it is for this kind of ACM to be so common in the game.
Again you miss the point. What it appears you want, is for there to be some way to make people fly like their lives depended on it. But in the game if I make a mistake, my life doesn't depend on it. Because of that, we can with no fear, or consequence, take our cartoon planes to the edge and fly them in ways that would not be conducive to long life in a combat situation if we failed at them. Does that mean I haven't stalled it too low and slow and augered? Heck no! I do it often trying to fight on the edge. I guess the aerodynamics worked in that case as I departed controlled flight and lost my cartoon life.
At this point I wonder why you care? The MA isn't real, we aren't going to die and many of us cartoon pilots are going to use all the tools our cartoon planes offer us. You know why? Because that's the challenge and the fun for some of us.
I note you never responded to my comments about how folks fly in scenarios vs how they fly in the MA. I think the world you want for your cartoon pilot is one based on one life and done. You can have it if you want it, just not in the world of MA. Asking us to play that way is just silly and pointless. Then again if you want to fly that way in the MA, go for it. Your choice, just like it's mine to fly it the way I like to.
-
do you think if it was more difficult and players were less able to avoid departing in these circumstances ...
do you think that fewer pilots would choose to get into those situations?
because that is my point ...
along with the fact that this type of flying is very unrealistic ...
and the way flaps work in these games artificially expands the envelopes of some planes so that the
match-ups are skewed and out of balance, which hurts the games credibility and immersion factor.
Again you miss the point. What it appears you want, is for there to be some way to make people fly like their lives depended on it. But in the game if I make a mistake, my life doesn't depend on it. Because of that, we can with no fear, or consequence, take our cartoon planes to the edge and fly them in ways that would not be conducive to long life in a combat situation if we failed at them. Does that mean I haven't stalled it too low and slow and augered? Heck no! I do it often trying to fight on the edge. I guess the aerodynamics worked in that case as I departed controlled flight and lost my cartoon life.
At this point I wonder why you care? The MA isn't real, we aren't going to die and many of us cartoon pilots are going to use all the tools our cartoon planes offer us. You know why? Because that's the challenge and the fun for some of us.
I note you never responded to my comments about how folks fly in scenarios vs how they fly in the MA. I think the world you want for your cartoon pilot is one based on one life and done. You can have it if you want it, just not in the world of MA. Asking us to play that way is just silly and pointless. Then again if you want to fly that way in the MA, go for it. Your choice, just like it's mine to fly it the way I like to.
-
which hurts the games credibility and emerson factor.
as long as the Lake & Palmer factors are modeled right, I'm willing to give HTC some leeway in modeling the Emerson factor :)
-
Thorsim-
Poor choice of video to support your theory.
Beyond the already mentioned aspects, I'd like to add that those planes weren't representing the way the AH planes are being flown in the game instances you refer to. Near stall speed, flaps fully deployed, throttle set low, intending to land is different than slow, full throttle, with flaps deployed, with no intention to land.
Getting caught in a suddenly life-threatening situation, that you have probably never experienced and now only get one try to survive, is different than trying to cut inside a cartoon plane for a shot...
In your response to colmbo, you give the two possible causes for those crashes as lack of control, or pilot "suckage". Awful narrow-minded... Could it have been anything else? Could it have been pilot fatigue, illness, distraction, obstructed view (which was the explanation given for the P51 crash here in Oshkosh, unless that's been amended?) lack of experience, damage to the plane, etc?
Planes like that are and were landed quite commonly with full flaps. Normally, it didn't result in a crash. The vast majority of the time everything turned out all right... The flaps were designed to "help" at those speeds, not create a way to kill the pilot.
RC is a bit different I suppose, but doing barrel rolls with full flaps doesn't destroy my plane, or make me crash... Of course, I'm not trying to fly inverted and maintain altitude then, but I'm not in the game (rolling scissors), either...
I fly a "flap-adjustable plane" in AH, almost every single time I fly. Going full flaps is not a great thing. They create a huge amount of drag, and make it very difficult for me to control exactly where I point my nose/guns. I'm using 20 degrees or less the vast majority of the time. When I deploy more, it's brief, and out of desperation or an "all or nothing" shot opportunity, ESPECIALLY if I'm low. My plane stalls around 76mph, and the full 50 degrees drop at 150mph, in case that question pops up.
I tend to agree with you, that excessive flap use is "normal" in AH. But as others mentioned, the "higher-skilled" crowd don't use them that way. That would seem to show that there may be an advantage to not using them as most folks do in the game...
As a trainer, I seldom see folks come to me who are using flaps "optimally". They're either not using them at all, or over-using them, or using them at the wrong times, in the wrong situations, etc. That type of use gets them killed, even though it may be from bullets instead of hitting the ground.
-
and the way flaps work in these games artificially expands the envelopes of some planes so that the
match-ups are skewed and out of balance, which hurts the games credibility and emerson factor.
The envelopes are also expanded by the ease of access to controls in our virtual cockpits, IMO anyway.
For example, I can manipulate flaps with one finger, while simultaneously operating throttle, landing gear, manual trim, aileron and elevator, firing guns, looking all around, and probably something(s) else, regardless of G-forces. This enables me to EFFICIENTLY manipulate flaps, in situations where only a six-armed pilot could do it in RL...
In the F4U at least, from what I've seen of the cockpit, I think I should realistically be able to only operate flaps OR throttle at one time. Not both, And certainly not both while doing several other things...
-
as long as the Lake & Palmer factors are modeled right, I'm willing to give HTC some leeway in modeling the Emerson factor :)
thanks corrected ...
col suggested it was only pilot error not me ...
i was asking him if he was sure about that, and suggesting the state of flight might have compounded the problem ...
Thorsim-
Poor choice of video to support your theory.
Beyond the already mentioned aspects, I'd like to add that those planes weren't representing the way the AH planes are being flown in the game instances you refer to. Near stall speed, flaps fully deployed, throttle set low, intending to land is different than slow, full throttle, with flaps deployed, with no intention to land.
Getting caught in a suddenly life-threatening situation, that you have probably never experienced and now only get one try to survive, is different than trying to cut inside a cartoon plane for a shot...
In your response to colmbo, you give the two possible causes for those crashes as lack of control, or pilot "suckage". Awful narrow-minded... Could it have been anything else? Could it have been pilot fatigue, illness, distraction, obstructed view (which was the explanation given for the P51 crash here in Oshkosh, unless that's been amended?) lack of experience, damage to the plane, etc?
Planes like that are and were landed quite commonly with full flaps. Normally, it didn't result in a crash. The vast majority of the time everything turned out all right... The flaps were designed to "help" at those speeds, not create a way to kill the pilot.
RC is a bit different I suppose, but doing barrel rolls with full flaps doesn't destroy my plane, or make me crash... Of course, I'm not trying to fly inverted and maintain altitude then, but I'm not in the game (rolling scissors), either...
I fly a "flap-adjustable plane" in AH, almost every single time I fly. Going full flaps is not a great thing. They create a huge amount of drag, and make it very difficult for me to control exactly where I point my nose/guns. I'm using 20 degrees or less the vast majority of the time. When I deploy more, it's brief, and out of desperation or an "all or nothing" shot opportunity, ESPECIALLY if I'm low. My plane stalls around 76mph, and the full 50 degrees drop at 150mph, in case that question pops up.
I tend to agree with you, that excessive flap use is "normal" in AH. But as others mentioned, the "higher-skilled" crowd don't use them that way. That would seem to show that there may be an advantage to not using them as most folks do in the game...
As a trainer, I seldom see folks come to me who are using flaps "optimally". They're either not using them at all, or over-using them, or using them at the wrong times, in the wrong situations, etc. That type of use gets them killed, even though it may be from bullets instead of hitting the ground.
just bugs me, as do the arguments for it "realistically".
i will let the "experts" defend it if they want, i just think that if it was more "normal" for something bad to happen when the flaps were used unwisely then there would be fewer eyebrow raising dogfight results. after all if history proves anything it is that low and slow vs a better maneuver fighter is a very unhealthy place to be.
no offense ...
+S+
t
-
The envelopes are also expanded by the ease of access to controls in our virtual cockpits, IMO anyway.
For example, I can manipulate flaps with one finger, while simultaneously operating throttle, landing gear, manual trim, aileron and elevator, firing guns, looking all around, and probably something(s) else, regardless of G-forces. This enables me to EFFICIENTLY manipulate flaps, in situations where only a six-armed pilot could do it in RL...
In the F4U at least, from what I've seen of the cockpit, I think I should realistically be able to only operate flaps OR throttle at one time. Not both, And certainly not both while doing several other things...
that is a good point, i don't see a fix but it is a good point none the less ...
-
my looking for the pony gives you about 90 mph to play with between stall speed and 40 degrees of flaps.
if you are at max flap deployment that buffer is only 60 mph ...
If anyone is using max flap deployment and trying to turn tight they are doing it wrong anyway. You cant argue with stupid as we all are reminded everyday. Now if you can look up the effect flaps has on aircraft flight and find one aspect that is out of whack please post it. Just one that you can prove is clearly wrong and wrong absent of anecdote but wrong by imperical evidence will do. Use the math if you have to at least a few of us can understand that.
Like mtnman says our controls and cockpits are much more efficient and we have many many more times the (virtual) flight experience of actual combat pilots so you would expect different approaches in use particularly because it doesnt matter (at least to some of us) that our cartoon airplane falls to pieces because the taxpayers have another one waiting for us in the hangar.
-
as long as the Lake & Palmer factors are modeled right, I'm willing to give HTC some leeway in modeling the Emerson factor :)
LOL!
ack-ack
-
If I may comment here,first "dive brakes" do bleed speed in this game,try them on the 88 or SBD.
Oh right those are true dive brakes,secondly the 38 has a "dive recovery flap" that produces little or no drag ingame and RL.
Secondly,I understand what Thor is saying,he'd like the LW planes to be able to use flaps at higher speed just like the US birds.Unfortunately the LW birds use the stated speeds in the POH and it's compound by the fact most fights in AHII are on the deck where IAS and TAS are to close to allow that to happen.
Now take a LW bird up to 30K and things change,the IAS and TAS have a large gap and suddenly at 300 mph TAS you can use flaps because the IAS is around the POH operating speeds.
I've read about LW pilots dropping flaps to engage and I know they had a limited amount of deflection that a pilot could use,but remember they were at considerable alt when doing so!
And lastly I concur with Dan,if it was 1 live and outta the game like "TRW" I'd fly completely different as well.
:salute
ps: the OP was about the "flat plate" move and it can be done in several planes in AHII,the Mossie and 110 are quite capable of doing it.Would I use it?Well as a last ditch desperate move,why not,your going to end up in the tower if you dont try something,,,As Dan's AAR have already stated.
-
do you think if it was more difficult and players were less able to avoid departing in these circumstances ...
do you think that fewer pilots would choose to get into those situations?
because that is my point ...
along with the fact that this type of flying is very unrealistic ...
and the way flaps work in these games artificially expands the envelopes of some planes so that the
match-ups are skewed and out of balance, which hurts the games credibility and immersion factor.
Look at your avatar. You are a CARTOON pilot. Talk about selective realism. Shall we get that discussion going? OK you want credibility. I'm going to expect you to put your computer in a freezer along with yourself. I want you on Oxygen for at least half the flight. I want random mechanical failure. I'll expect you to fly missions assigned by someone else in the airplane you are assigned. You may or may not see a bad guy in 250 or so hours of your tour. You may be in an attack plane or in less then the latest and greatest. Think P40E out of Clark Field at the beginning of the US involvement in the war, or potentially a Stuka over England. Maybe a 39 out of New Guiniea or an I-16 at the beginning of Barbarossa. You may be assigned to fly tail end charlie.
To be honest, at this point I think you are arguing for the sake of seeing your own words on the screen.
What's interesting to me is you talk about immersion. I've got 40+ years of WW2 aviation history under my belt, and I don't seem to have any trouble finding times where I'm 'in the cockpit" as far as my imagination and history interest can take me. Low level 25s, P38s or P39s winging it. Again I mention scenarios as the last one I flew was as close as I will probably ever get to experiencing what I've spent most of my life researching.
My suggestion is you get your perspective back and enjoy AH for what it is, a game. In the end it's your imagination that will allow you to enjoy it or not enjoy it. All the technobabble excuses in the world ends up just being a cover for your inability to find the fun yourself.
It's a game after all. It's meant to be fun.
-
If I may comment here,first "dive brakes" do bleed speed in this game,try them on the 88 or SBD.
Oh right those are true dive brakes,secondly the 38 has a "dive recovery flap" that produces little or no drag ingame and RL.
Secondly,I understand what Thor is saying,he'd like the LW planes to be able to use flaps at higher speed just like the US birds.Unfortunately the LW birds use the stated speeds in the POH and it's compound by the fact most fights in AHII are on the deck where IAS and TAS are to close to allow that to happen.
Now take a LW bird up to 30K and things change,the IAS and TAS have a large gap and suddenly at 300 mph TAS you can use flaps because the IAS is around the POH operating speeds.
I've read about LW pilots dropping flaps to engage and I know they had a limited amount of deflection that a pilot could use,but remember they were at considerable alt when doing so!
And lastly I concur with Dan,if it was 1 live and outta the game like "TRW" I'd fly completely different as well.
:salute
ps: the OP was about the "flat plate" move and it can be done in several planes in AHII,the Mossie and 110 are quite capable of doing it.Would I use it?Well as a last ditch desperate move,why not,your going to end up in the tower if you dont try something,,,As Dan's AAR have already stated.
not exactly i just don't think the use of combat flaps changed the situation that much ...
if what happens in the game was correct then there would have been little argument about which plane turned better spit or 109, as it is even with the 109s low deployment flaps the reality was a very close thing ...
i think the flaps in game are much more of a help and much less of a hinderance than they actually were in TRW.
although equity in flap deployment speed decisions would be nice in game.
-
Pilot added to custom squelch list per user request as defined in 'no valid argument given.'
-
not exactly i just don't think the use of combat flaps changed the situation that much ...
if what happens in the game was correct then there would have been little argument about which plane turned better spit or 109, as it is even with the 109s low deployment flaps the reality was a very close thing ...
i think the flaps in game are much more of a help and much less of a hinderance than they actually were in TRW.
although equity in flap deployment speed decisions would be nice in game.
I'm not sure what the first statement means.
The spit 109 debate will go on as long as people are aware of both A/C and what they represent.
As has for flaps ingame and real life,as has been said opinions vary.
And lastly if there was equity between A/C flaps,I ask you "why bother to create different A/C" equity could be achieved by everyone fly the same plane,isnt that the point of different A/C,each has it's own strengths and weaknesses.As far as I'm aware HTC strives for as close to "realistic" A/C performance,given the paramiters of the computer sim would allow.
Is it prefect,no,several minor details need addressing.That said it's the best flight modeling I've come across in the few years that I've been flying flight sims.
:salute
-
the first statement is about the change in the envelopes caused by the use of combat flaps ...
my point about the spit 109 is that the 109 had low deflection flaps and the spit did not, yet in the real world although the flaps did improve things slightly it seems not to have clearly made the 109s far superior in turning i see no reason to expect that they would, it seems different in here ...
i was not discussing equality in operation i was pointing out the apparent disparity in the methodology as some planes are deploying their low deflection flaps at over twice the speed as their POH says is safe, while others are 10% less than what their POH says it should be able to be deployed.
also many of the POH expressly discourage large deflection angles for flight, some even for landing.
there are other force/deflection angle/speed arguments that are ignored in favor of the POH yet there are other parts of the POH that are ignored in favor of other criteria. consistency of criteria should be consistent imo.
i am having fun and the FM is not any worse than many others i have experience with, my problems with it are pretty much what i have stated.
+S+
t
I'm not sure what the first statement means.
The spit 109 debate will go on as long as people are aware of both A/C and what they represent.
As has for flaps ingame and real life,as has been said opinions vary.
And lastly if there was equity between A/C flaps,I ask you "why bother to create different A/C" equity could be achieved by everyone fly the same plane,isnt that the point of different A/C,each has it's own strengths and weaknesses.As far as I'm aware HTC strives for as close to "realistic" A/C performance,given the paramiters of the computer sim would allow.
Is it prefect,no,several minor details need addressing.That said it's the best flight modeling I've come across in the few years that I've been flying flight sims.
:salute
-
That move is do-able in-game and is very fun! Kind of disorienting the first few times you do it. Like Steve said though... it's really quite a last ditch thing, you lose all your speed and at least 2k in altitude before you can start to pull up again.
I've found the maneuver works best with one notch of flaps in-game. You really have to pick your moment with this move too cause it lines you up for a very easy shot if they are far enough behind you. I only use it when they are 200 or less off and we are moving at a pretty good clip.
Please!!!!! do the maneuver and film it and post film, this maneuver is impossible to do as depicted by the video, you may do some maneuver but not that one.
RV6flyer
40 years flying 31 years flight instructor
-
that is an exact example of my point that you just previously said wasn't ...
all the rest are examples of poor maneuverability and controllability, lack of options in a very flap extended "dirty" airframe. all the bad landings were unable to be corrected or successfully aborted because of the pilots lack of alternatives in that extreme flap deployment configuration at low speeds ...
(the very condition the same planes excel at in AH)
Just proves you are muttering through your mush, have you read the NTSB reports?
-
i was not discussing equality in operation i was pointing out the apparent disparity in the methodology as some planes are deploying their low deflection flaps at over twice the speed as their POH says is safe, while others are 10% less than what their POH says it should be able to be deployed.
also many of the POH expressly discourage large deflection angles for flight, some even for landing.
there are other force/deflection angle/speed arguments that are ignored in favor of the POH yet there are other parts of the POH that are ignored in favor of other criteria. consistency of criteria should be consistent imo.
+S+
t
Ok if you can back this statement up I'd like to see proof,the over twice their speed part would do.
And if you prove this to me I'll jump on your bandwagon,I prefer the LW ride and if you can backup this premise I'd agree.
However I have more influence than any other player,So proving it to me is of little consequences.
-
There is one and only one thing I have found that I can do online in a P-51D that I dont believe could be done in real life. I do not believe that a real P-51D could land with a full bomb load and full of fuel but that does not lend thorsim any credibility for his argument because this is a problem with load handling limitations and not flight.
There are two mentions of flaps on the P-51 POH (P-51 Airplane - Pilot's Handbook of Flight Operating Instructions). The first is a picture showing the location of the actuation lever and the other is flap instructions during landing as seen in the image below here and you should note the flaps are always in the fully extended position. There is no warning about dangers with the flaps out or any mention of maximum speed for extending flaps (although I know there is a placard in the cockpit listing speeds limitations).
(http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/qq197/Chalenge08/Landing_P-51POH.jpg)
-
look at the p40 POH and compare it's stated flap deployment speeds to the ones in game.
ta152 was stated to be 20 mph to slow for first flap deployment ...
what does the hog's pos say about flaps challenger and then re read my post. ..
still waiting for your examples of how full flap combat is a-ok historically
Ok if you can back this statement up I'd like to see proof,the over twice their speed part would do.
And if you prove this to me I'll jump on your bandwagon,I prefer the LW ride and if you can backup this premise I'd agree.
However I have more influence than any other player,So proving it to me is of little consequences.
-
I knew the p40 flaps werent right and expected them to be corrected when the model is updated to AHII standard.
As for the 152,I'd heard their deployment speed was somewhat higher but no documentaion to prove,or documentation stating different facts.
I never said full flaps during combat was a good idea,infact one of the trainers did an intensive study on flap deployment and anything over 2 notches was begining to have diminising returns.
Again your 2 examples would fall into that minor catagory of things needing to be addressed.
At this point this thread has gone so far off track,I'm guilty myself of derailing it that I will no further comment except to the original subject.
:salute
-
If someone has the P-40 or P-47 POH (Pilot's Flight Operating Instructions - any model) please copy the appropriate section and paste a copy of it here. It will be just like the section I posted above (lacking deployment limitations).
The only existing POH (aircraft handbook) for a Focke-Wulf that I am aware of is that of a FW 190 A-5/A-6 or FW 190 F-8.
I did ask 'Bud' Anderson about this specifically and he said in combat you do what it takes.
-
yea sorry ...
just got started on flaps after the pony is under modeled example ...
imo the p40 speeds are probably correct physically but are way off the poh, imo they should be an example of what to do, not what is wrong ...
it is not like the world ended cuz the plane has usable combat flaps ...
but thats the last i will post here ...
I knew the p40 flaps werent right and expected them to be corrected when the model is updated to AHII standard.
As for the 152,I'd heard their deployment speed was somewhat higher but no documentaion to prove,or documentation stating different facts.
I never said full flaps during combat was a good idea,infact one of the trainers did an intensive study on flap deployment and anything over 2 notches was begining to have diminising returns.
Again your 2 examples would fall into that minor catagory of things needing to be addressed.
At this point this thread has gone so far off track,I'm guilty myself of derailing it that I will no further comment except to the original subject.
:salute
bud anderson has it right, you do what you gotta do ...
imo that means the POH is not the best criteria on a lot of things
and "what you gotta do", may not work very well, even though it is your best option ...
++S++
t
If someone has the P-40 or P-47 POH (Pilot's Flight Operating Instructions - any model) please copy the appropriate section and paste a copy of it here. It will be just like the section I posted above (lacking deployment limitations).
The only existing POH (aircraft handbook) for a Focke-Wulf that I am aware of is that of a FW 190 A-5/A-6 or FW 190 F-8.
I did ask 'Bud' Anderson about this specifically and he said in combat you do what it takes.
-
still waiting for your examples of how full flap combat is a-ok historically
Did you not see my quote of Cy Homer from the wartime 5th AF fighter pilot's bible "Twelve to One"? He was very clear. You do what it takes including full flaps if it is necessary.
-
Was there ever any historical note of what flaps setting McGuire might have deployed when he stalled his unskinned 38 and crashed to his death?
-
Unskinned? I dont remember all the details of the event but I do know he had drop tanks (slightly tail-heavy perhaps) and he was in a fight. Flaps dont really make much difference in a spin but I dont think they hurt anything and in fact they would probably help get some oscillation going in an inverted spin which might help get the nose down. That works in AH anyway.
The only reason you might want to use less than full flaps in a landing is (in TRW): practice... gusting winds... strong crosswinds... slips if flaps spoil wash over the tail...ice. Of these reasons only slips or practice could influence you online and I dont think the game models spoiling of wash over the tail. If you want to argue about tail spoilage... count me out I didnt even see anyone mention it until I did and it has nothing to do with a turn fight (unless you are holding off airspeed and slipping down to a fight in which case you wont have flaps out).
-
I never said full flaps during combat was a good idea,infact one of the trainers did an intensive study on flap deployment and anything over 2 notches was begining to have diminising returns.
:salute
The only problem is that thorsim will ignore what the trainers say and what we've been telling him along. See, it doesn't fit what thorsim believes to be true so he flushes it down the toilet. His real motivation is to change how some players use flaps by changing the flight model, regardless of the fact that the more experienced and veteran players don't use flaps like he insists are used by teh majority on every single flight.
He has also failed to show each time he's been asked any proof that the flaps are modeled incorrectly for any plane, he just uses the same tired mantra over and over, "real life pilots didn't fly that way...". Now I understand why HiTech bowed out of the last thread thorsim took part in, it is frustrating talking to something that has the comprehension of a brick wall.
ack-ack
-
Was there ever any historical note of what flaps setting McGuire might have deployed when he stalled his unskinned 38 and crashed to his death?
Flaps played absolutely no part in McGuire's death. He got into a spin and at the altitude he was at (IIRC, around 500 to 300ft) impossible to recover and it wasn't "his" P-38, he was flying another pilot's plane.
ack-ack
-
The only problem is that thorsim will ignore what the trainers say and what we've been telling him along. See, it doesn't fit what thorsim believes to be true so he flushes it down the toilet. His real motivation is to change how some players use flaps by changing the flight model, regardless of the fact that the more experienced and veteran players don't use flaps like he insists are used by teh majority on every single flight.
He has also failed to show each time he's been asked any proof that the flaps are modeled incorrectly for any plane, he just uses the same tired mantra over and over, "real life pilots didn't fly that way...". Now I understand why HiTech bowed out of the last thread thorsim took part in, it is frustrating talking to something that has the comprehension of a brick wall.
ack-ack
Agreed Ack,just wanted my kick at the cat,so to speak... :D
:salute