Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Stoney on May 02, 2010, 10:50:09 AM
-
Please post all questions or discussion in this thread. Objectives will be issued later today.
:salute
Stoney
-
No offense Stoney, but the Brewster should not be part of this setup. It's not the right model. The I-16 is closer to the performance that the F2A-1/2 had which was what the forces in Burma had. I realize you know the specs and all but just for clarification.
Brewster SPECIFICATIONS
Wingspan:
35 ft (10.67 m)
Wing Area:
209 sq ft (19.42 sq m)
Length:
F2A-1: 26 ft (7.92 m)
F2A-2: 25 ft 7 in (7.80 m)
F2A-3: 26 ft 4 in (8.03 m)
Height:
F2A-1: 11 ft 8 in (3.56 m)
F2A-2 and -3: 12 ft 1 in (3.68 m)
Empty weight:
F2A-1: 3,785 lbs (1,716.84 kg)
F2A-2: 4,576 lbs (2,075.64 kg)
F2A-3: 4,732 lbs (2,146,40 kg)
Gross weight
F2A-1: 5,055 lbs (2,292.90 kg)
F2A-2: 5,942 lbs (2,695.25 kg)
F2A-3: 6,321 lbs (2,867.16 kg)
Maximum speed:
F2A-1: 271 mph (436.13 km/h) at sea level; 301 mph (484.41 km/h) at 17,000 ft (5,182.60 m)
F2A-2: 285 mph (458.66 km/h) at sea level; 323 mph (519.82 km/h) at 16,500 ft (5,029.20 m)
F2A-3: 284 mph (457.05 km/h) at sea level; 321 mph (516.60 km/h) at 16,500 ft (5,029.20 m)
Climb in 1 minute:
F2A-1: 3,060 ft (932.69 m)
F2A-2: 2,500 ft (762.00 m)
F2A-3: 2,290 ft (697.99 m)
Service ceiling:
F2A-1: 32,500 ft (9,906.00 m)
F2A-2: 34,000 ft (10,363.20 m)
F2A-3: 33,200 ft (10,119.36 m)
Range:
F2A-1: 1,095 mi (1,762.23 km)
F2A-2: 1,015 mi (1,633.48 km)
F2A-3: 965 mi (1,553.02 km)
Maximum range:
F2A-1: 1,545 mi (2,486.44 km)
F2A-2: 1,670 mi (2,687.60 km)
F2A-3: 1,680 mi (2,703.70 km)
Normal fuel:
F2A-1: 160 US gal (605.67 l)
F2A-2: 242 US gal (916.07 l)
F2A-3: 240 US gal (908.50 l)
Polikarpov I-16 Type 18
Dimensions:
Wing span: 29 ft. 6.5 in (9.18 m)
Length: 6.13 m (20 ft 1.25 in)
Height: 8 ft 5 in (2.57 m)
Weights:
Empty: 3,110 lb. (1,412 kg)
Operational: 4,034 lb (1,831 kg)
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 288 mph (463 km/h)
Service Ceiling: 29,500 ft. (8,998 m)
Range: 500 miles (805 km)
Powerplant:
Shvetsov M-62R 1,000 hp 9-cylinder radial.
Armament:
Two 7.62 mm machine guns with two 20 mm cannon
-
TBM was originally listed in the Side Assignments thread, but not included in the Write up. Are there min/max numbers for the TBM's?
-
No offense Stoney, but the Brewster should not be part of this setup.
In the past, we've used the F4F to sub for the F2A. The Brewster is a lot closer to the F2A than the F4F. This is merely something we have to do with some of these setups because we lack the actual aircraft. The I-16 was being flown by the Chinese Air Force at this time though, so we'll use all 4 fighters.
I appreciate the clarification.
-
TBM was originally listed in the Side Assignments thread, but not included in the Write up. Are there min/max numbers for the TBM's?
I deleted the TBM from the plane set, as the Allies will be on the defensive all 3 frames.
-
In the past, we've used the F4F to sub for the F2A. The Brewster is a lot closer to the F2A than the F4F. This is merely something we have to do with some of these setups because we lack the actual aircraft. The I-16 was being flown by the Chinese Air Force at this time though, so we'll use all 4 fighters.
I appreciate the clarification.
it is my understanding that the Brewster is an F2A that was moderately upgraded and lend-leased to the Finns.
-
it is my understanding that the Brewster is an F2A that was moderately upgraded and lend-leased to the Finns.
We don't have the model of Brewster that the RAF flew in Burma--that's what Gyrene was commenting on.
-
Our brewster is a bit of a monster the way it's modeled now. It out-flies an F4F most ways from Sunday. It's a little slower, blows an F4F away in climb rate, blows it away in turn rate, and can hold its own against zeros. Historically, this is a farce compared to what went on in the Pacific, IMO.
But hey, I'm not the one setting it up, so not my call.
-
Hi Stoney,
In the interest of encouraging pilots to fly a little more "realistically" (i.e., a little less suicidally), please consider awarding points for surviving the Frame and making a good landing at the end.
Thanks! :salute
-
Hi Stoney,
In the interest of encouraging pilots to fly a little more "realistically" (i.e., a little less suicidally), please consider awarding points for surviving the Frame and making a good landing at the end.
Thanks! :salute
If you've got a good, time-effective idea on how to do that, I'm all ears. Parsing the raw logs for takeoff and landing information is pretty much slow-go.
-
So the Chinese flew I-16's?
perdweeb
-
Just looked in my handy dandy....book. Chinese DID have I-16s. Shocking. Although they had type 16 and 18s.
perdweeb
-
We do try to conduct some research for these things...
:aok
-
:lol No matter how hard I try not to...I learn something new on these forums every day. (but I did know about the Chinese having I-16s) :D
-
If you've got a good, time-effective idea on how to do that, I'm all ears. Parsing the raw logs for takeoff and landing information is pretty much slow-go.
If you could let me know where to grab an old raw-log sample, I'm pretty sure I could write either an awk & sed script or a bit of Perl for you.
-
I used to search the regular logs on ahevents.org, Time consuming yes, but it wasn't to bad.
I would use Ctrl-F "Landed Successfully" in Firefox and just record every "real" landing. I say real because there was always people with two or three landings.
-
I used to search the regular logs on ahevents.org, Time consuming yes, but it wasn't to bad.
I would use Ctrl-F "Landed Successfully" in Firefox and just record every "real" landing. I say real because there was always people with two or three landings.
I won't have access to the regular logs.
@Bino... I can't send you raw log information, but I'll pass this idea up to DD and see if we can make use of your offer.
-
Hi Stoney,
In the interest of encouraging pilots to fly a little more "realistically" (i.e., a little less suicidally), please consider awarding points for surviving the Frame and making a good landing at the end.
Thanks! :salute
I always thought the survival bonus was that the enemy didn't get the points for your safely-landed aircraft. :D
-
On the other hand, it often simply rewards the side that's winning already. There are pros and cons for its use. If there's a landslide and one side is wiped out, such a reward simply addes hundreds of points to the victors. Only really helps in balanced rounds (which are totally unpredictable as to when they'll happen! :) )
-
I won't have access to the regular logs.
@Bino... I can't send you raw log information, but I'll pass this idea up to DD and see if we can make use of your offer.
I was thinking the same thing - happy to help with scripting if needed.
-
FYI the raw logs are for HTC and CM use only and they will not be made available to any one else. That is right from the top.