Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: viking73 on March 08, 2011, 11:11:50 PM
-
HTC, you read anything on the P-47 11,25, 40 and they all say that they were very good at high altitude but would never dogfight at low or even medium altitudes. The reason being of course was it's weight and non-aerobatic capabilities. It was called "the jug" for good reasons.
However, in this game, it can turn, do aerobatics, and maneuver almost like a spit. Even flying them I shake my head at some of the stuff I can do as I shoot down other planes. I had to laugh when HTC promoted that video on their website "wings of prey" showing all the crazy moves that a jug couldn't do. Proof of how bad this game has gotten. AH2 has been slowly moving from a good flight sim to an arcade game and that video just proved it. So like the P-47's, many of the planes are not taught on how a plane really flies (which many real pilots know here) but teach what it does in this pinball machine game. Thinking about sending quarters as my payment from now on.
Also, having flown the F4U models from the beginning, since that was our main plane in the Marine Air Wing, have noticed a big change in it as well. It was a "hog" flying and modeled correctly. Even using flaps we didn't attempt what can be done today. So I guess many things have changed to attract and keep more customers. Maybe good business sense but unfortunate to see happen to what was a good flight sim.
:salute
-
Anecdotes but no data
None of the P-47s are competitive with Spitfires of probably any mark as far as maneuverability goes.
-
*yawn* Name the "crazy moves" that a Jug shouldn't be able to do.
Well, let me see, the sources say that the P-47 should be out-turned and out-climbed by 109s...and they are in AHII...badly.
Jugs roll well..this is right in line with their historical performance.
Jugs have a lousy sustained turn rate and nearly as lousy sustained turn radius. The only things Jugs do well slow is just kind of wallow along flying barely above stall..which they *did*.
The typical ACM used by a Jug ace in AHII is to use its roll rate and ability to dump energy in a hurry quickly to force an overshoot. This has nothing to do with turn rate, climb rate, or other performance metric where the Jug is inferior. The only way to argue against this is to suggest that Jugs should roll poorly and retain energy well under Gs, which I don't think you can reasonably do.
HTC, you read anything on the P-47 11,25, 40 and they all say that they were very good at high altitude but would never dogfight at low or even medium altitudes. The reason being of course was it's weight and non-aerobatic capabilities. It was called "the jug" for good reasons. :ahand
However, in this game, it can turn, do aerobatics, and maneuver almost like a spit.
:salute
Oh God, not this seriously flawed concept of flight physics again. :bhead
14,000 pound Jug is too "heavy" to do aerobatics huh? By that logic the 36,000 pound F-18 used by Blue Angels must be way, way, way too heavy for aerobatics.
-
I'm an above-average Spit 9 pilot. Meaning that most ofl the good ones will kill me in it but I'll feast on noobs. A few months back a P-47 raid went after some random base. I up in my lovely pink Spit 9 (offends people to get shot down by a pink spit) and end up fighting 4 Jugs on the deck. There were actually 7 or 8 jugs but the others were trying to get the town down. I end up killing three of the jugs before others show up and the fight is over.
If the 47 were even close to a Spit I would not have looked like a hero.
One of my squadies did find an original report from WW 2 that notes the P47 outrolled the Fw-190. I've read it and now wonder.
I don't know about modeling, what is correct or not. I enjoy this game though and happy for how it is structured.
Boo
-
One of my squadies did find an original report from WW 2 that notes the P47 outrolled the Fw-190. I've read it and now wonder.
Boo
Bob Johnson talked about out-rolling 190s in his 47. Un-boosted ailerons being what they were, who could roll fastest between the two types probably depended on the pilot's upper body strength as much as anything else. Whatever the case, it is certain both planes were near tops in roll rate during WWII.
-
HTC, you read anything on the P-47 11,25, 40 and they all say that they were very good at high altitude but would never dogfight at low or even medium altitudes. The reason being of course was it's weight and non-aerobatic capabilities. It was called "the jug" for good reasons.
what you most likely did was go against a good pilot that knew what to do to get you in his sights... I can out fly some spitfires in my 51 while in turn fights also if i have alot of alt to do it. Its hard to do but can be done. You just need to be in the same plane for months or even years before you get every inch of it down to do the near impossible.
All in all, none of the P47s can sustain a low speed turn or climb that the Spitfires can. But they can still kill the spits if flown correctly, if not absurdly against it.
-
No aircraft could outroll the fw190 A-series at normal combat speed , not even a spit16 :bolt:
-
...
It was called "the jug" for good reasons.
...
An non of them had anything to do with its turn ability.
The rest is also wrong as other have already pointed out. The only thing I found "suspicious" is how flaps are modeled in AH, but no data exists to check against and the only thing that makes it "suspicious" is the small amount of anecdotal evidence for extensive use of them in combat.
-
LOL...
Ever take a 51 with 25 fuel and a drop tank to a field and run into a Spit 16 or Spit 9 with 100 fuel? Whats even funnier is when you are nearly 100 fuel and kill a 25 fuel "guru." Im sure he will be along shortly to call one of us "timid." :D
-
Who takes 25% in a spitfire...
-
Who takes 25% in a spitfire...
You need to spend some time in early and midwar arenas. :D
-
There are certainly references to people saying that Jugs were too big and heavy to dogfight. Those statements were all made by people who never flew the P-47. I am not aware of any references stating the Jug could not do aerobatics. Even the Pilot handbook states that aerobatics are easy in the Jug and that the Jug, despite it's size and weight, is easy to fly and handles very well.
With regards to the F4U modeling, I'll assume that Viking73's opinion is on a par with his opinion of the P-47 modeling. Maybe he can post some data to back up his claims.
-
Heh, heh....he must've been shot down by a jug while flying a spitfire. LOL....the overconfidence and the underestimation of the abilities of a P-47. I know the P-47 well enough that if she's low on fuel (less than 25%), I'll enter a turnfight with a spitfire. If the spit driver's not paying attention or doesn't have his mojo, he's a smokin hole within a turn or two...if it goes further than that, I know I need to exit stage left or I'll be the smokin hole. Hehe...know your aircraft and win some fights...know your opponent's and be undefeated (unless the horde comes to shoot you down :lol) Hmmm...Sun Tsu, doesn't seem to translate too well to the unfriendly skies of AH2 :joystick:
-
D...A...T...A...
???
-
Of all the planes to whine about. :rolleyes:
If your Spitfire loses a turn fight to a Jug, the problem is your flying sucks.
-
No aircraft could outroll the fw190 A-series at normal combat speed , not even a spit16 :bolt:
Define "normal combat speed"...
Several factors will determine the roll rate of any fighter. Two that can vary widely are speed and pilot strength.
Consider that most roll data is taken with a very specific stick force applied (most commonly, 50 lb). What happens when 100 lb is applied? How about 200 lb? Another thing usually overlooked is that the 190's roll rate drops off very quickly at high speed. NACA data shows that with 50 lb of stick force applied, the P-51B rolls faster than the 190 at all speeds above 360 mph indicated, being much faster at 380 mph indicated. Likewise, the P-47 rolls faster above 380 mph indicated. Bob Johnson was considered by his fellow 56th pilots to be one of the strongest pilots in the group. Now, factor in the brute upper body strength of someone like Johnson, and it is entirely plausible that he could roll his P-47 faster than a Fw 190.
-
Bob Johnson talked about out-rolling 190s in his 47. Un-boosted ailerons being what they were, who could roll fastest between the two types probably depended on the pilot's upper body strength as much as anything else. Whatever the case, it is certain both planes were near tops in roll rate during WWII.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/naca868-rollchart.jpg
-
I just about exclusively fly the jugs, I love shooting down spits in it!
If I am not in a Jug I am in an FM2
why would anyone want to fly spits all the time? I can't stand them! seems like the higher the number of the spit, the lesser the ability of the pilot, or at least, the lesser his desire to master anything other than Easy kill!
Start in the D-11 and work your way up, land a few kills in each one, then maybe you will figure out, it isn't just the plane!
(http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg229/WWhiskey/game%20stuff%20and%20other/P4778thMXWweb.jpg)
-
You suffer with dogma my friend. I like to up the p47d11 on fumes (25 to 50%) with a drop tank, six guns, and light ammo, just to find guys like you. The jug my have weighed twice as much but it also had twice the power. Consider also that there is a vertical component to combat performance.
Most people think the Brewster is also over modeled in AH but thats because we thought they sucked before the war. Later Finland got hold a few dozen and became the best air force of WW2 with a k/d ratio almost 9 to 1. Was Finland over modeled? Or do we suffer from our own preconceived notions?
-
1. Was Finland over modeled?
Why, yes. Pilot skill, training, and commitment is what made the difference in that war.
-
HTC, you read anything on the P-47 11,25, 40 and they all say that they were very good at high altitude but would never dogfight at low or even medium altitudes. The reason being of course was it's weight and non-aerobatic capabilities. It was called "the jug" for good reasons.
However, in this game, it can turn, do aerobatics, and maneuver almost like a spit. Even flying them I shake my head at some of the stuff I can do as I shoot down other planes. I had to laugh when HTC promoted that video on their website "wings of prey" showing all the crazy moves that a jug couldn't do. Proof of how bad this game has gotten. AH2 has been slowly moving from a good flight sim to an arcade game and that video just proved it. So like the P-47's, many of the planes are not taught on how a plane really flies (which many real pilots know here) but teach what it does in this pinball machine game. Thinking about sending quarters as my payment from now on.
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...please, show me the JUG that can outfight a Spit...I would love to know how they do it. Unless ya stay fast and get in and out yer toast. Ask JUGgler (prob subject matter xpert on JUG in AH) how he does it and Ill gurantee ya that he may win somethin like that more often than some of us...but he would not agree with ya. <S>
-
I met Latrobe yesterday. He was in a d40 jug, me in a g6. He could outscissor me. Was a nasty shock.
Just saying.
-
I only mentioned the Spit due to it's history of ability to turn fight. I fly all types of aircraft and the Spit is the least. Like I said, I know the Corsair from years of flying it almost exclusively in the MAW. It did not do what it does today.
Ok you wanted data. Here is performance info by the USAAF PROOF DEPARTMENT, TACTICAL COMBAT SECTION, ARMY AIR FORCES PROVING GROUND COMMAND, EGLIN FIELD, FLORIDA
FINAL REPORT ON TACTICAL SUITABILITY OF THE P-47C-1 TYPE AIRCRAFT
18 December 1942
(e) In close fighting the P-47C-1, due to its faster aileron roll, can quickly reverse turn and break off the combat almost at will. However, due to the large turning circle and low rate of climb, it is deemed inadvisable to attempt to dog fight with any type of enemy fighter now used in the combat area.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html)
-
Good thing we don't have the C model in Aces High.
-
Lepape must have gotten him :P
-
I met Latrobe yesterday. He was in a d40 jug, me in a g6. He could outscissor me. Was a nasty shock.
Just saying.
The driving "decision-maker" in AH scissor encounters is not the plane. It's the guys doing the scissors.
The fact that one of you was in a D40, while the other was in a G6 really means very little, if anything.
-
The driving "decision-maker" in AH scissor encounters is not the plane. It's the guys doing the scissors.
The fact that one of you was in a D40, while the other was in a G6 really means very little, if anything.
I know im a lame pilot, but could hold my own against muppets in 109 vs 109, so maybe i know how to scissor. I got him anyway, but when he forced me into a sustained scissor, he could slowly overtake me. Was a bit downhill, all flaps out, rudder kicked, throttle chopped. Jug is WAY better than most people think.
-
I know im a lame pilot, but could hold my own against muppets in 109 vs 109, so maybe i know how to scissor. I got him anyway, but when he forced me into a sustained scissor, he could slowly overtake me. Was a bit downhill, all flaps out, rudder kicked, throttle chopped. Jug is WAY better than most people think.
I agree, the notion that its all the pilot and not the plane is not valid. If you are fighting against a plane that is better at that kind of 'fight', then given roughly equal pilots, the plane is what makes the difference, not the pilot. And I can vouch for Debroedy, he's a good stick.
That being said, there are some excellent Jug pilots, and the D-11 isn't a bad plane at all. Most jugs, with their monster flaps, are not bad at dog fighting, its just that they are often leaded down with way, way, way, to much fuel.
-
leaded down with way, way, way, to much fuel.
Or, as I contend, usually with too much ammo...
-
I know im a lame pilot, but could hold my own against muppets in 109 vs 109, so maybe i know how to scissor. I got him anyway, but when he forced me into a sustained scissor, he could slowly overtake me. Was a bit downhill, all flaps out, rudder kicked, throttle chopped. Jug is WAY better than most people think.
It wasn't a comment on your skill level. I don't remember ever bumping into you, so I wouldn't comment on your skill level.
It was a comment directed towards using a plane vs plane comparison, which is generally taken as if assuming both pilots are equal (which they seldom are). I don't accept comments like "but could hold my own against <insert squad> in 109 vs 109, so..." as meaning much either.
Yes, the jug is a pretty dang good plane. I used to fly it quite a bit.
When it comes to plane vs plane / pilot vs pilot not being valid, I can only speak from experience. I seldom see pilots use their ride to their advantage, while I often see pilots use their ride to their opponents advantage. I've worked with a large number of people in the TA, almost all of which "knew how to scissor". Only a small minority could actually scissor well. The vast majority could be out-scissored by technique, regardless of what they "should" have been able to do based on the ride they were in.
Really, that was one of the first things I learned when I started out as a trainer. The vast majority of people who "want to learn to fly a <insert plane>" really just need work on technique. Once you know the techniques, the actual plane choice means much less. Once you know the technique, you can hop into almost anything and do pretty dang good.
-
Not trying to challenge you MtMan, and I will say that you are one of the very best. :salute
I agree that the better pilot will usually win out but wouldn't improving your 'technique', make you the better pilot, and then no longer 'equal' to your opponent in skill?
-
P47's did not begin combat missions untill March 10 1943.
Do you have any revised data from winter 43 summer 44 on P47D combat recomendations after they had been in combat for awhile? Your data is from 18 December 1942 concerning P47C-1's. Our P47's ingame start at P47D-11.
I flew with Nomde and Frenchy in the 56th from AH1 through the start of AH2. If anything the current P47's are a bit doggier than they were back then except for the WEP performance with the new P47M.
You have been in the game long enough that maybe you are making the aircraft in question too easy in your own mind and this post is a longing for those old days when you had to work harder and your victories ment more because of it.
-
Not trying to challenge you MtMan, and I will say that you are one of the very best. :salute
I agree that the better pilot will usually win out but wouldn't improving your 'technique', make you the better pilot, and then no longer 'equal' to your opponent in skill?
No problem Ardy, I wasn't feeling challenged! :salute
Yes, and that pilot inequality is precisely why I don't put any faith in the "I was out-turned (etc) by a xxx" as meaning much at all when it comes to plane capabilities or modeling. I'm also pretty skeptical when I hear e-state estimations, and how they factored into that particular engagement. That's why film is nice.
There are a lot of times I can out-scissor (or whatever) a specific plane with ease. Then again, a lot of times I don't stand much of a chance pulling that same maneuver off against that same plane (and of course, my ride is pretty standard)... It depends on a lot of things...
-
The link you provided is not run by the USAF, not the old USAAC or USAAF.
Based on this thread it's probably a good thing you don't post more often.
Do you even play anymore?
I only mentioned the Spit due to it's history of ability to turn fight. I fly all types of aircraft and the Spit is the least. Like I said, I know the Corsair from years of flying it almost exclusively in the MAW. It did not do what it does today.
Ok you wanted data. Here is performance info by the USAAF PROOF DEPARTMENT, TACTICAL COMBAT SECTION, ARMY AIR FORCES PROVING GROUND COMMAND, EGLIN FIELD, FLORIDA
FINAL REPORT ON TACTICAL SUITABILITY OF THE P-47C-1 TYPE AIRCRAFT
18 December 1942
(e) In close fighting the P-47C-1, due to its faster aileron roll, can quickly reverse turn and break off the combat almost at will. However, due to the large turning circle and low rate of climb, it is deemed inadvisable to attempt to dog fight with any type of enemy fighter now used in the combat area.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html)
-
Consider that most roll data is taken with a very specific stick force applied (most commonly, 50 lb).
wow 50lbs of force! so at 5gs, that would be 250lbs of force? Thats a tremendous amount of force to pull when sitting down and not having much leverage. Modern fighters hit as much as 9g for short periods so that would be 450lbs... is that even possible for most people? (most pilots weren't build like Arnold Schwarzenegger).
err... my math is probably wrong, is the 50lbs is close to constant, and only the weight of the 'arm' changes with the Gs?
-
HTC, you read anything on the P-47 11,25, 40 and they all say that they were very good at high altitude but would never dogfight at low or even medium altitudes. The reason being of course was it's weight and non-aerobatic capabilities. It was called "the jug" for good reasons.
However, in this game, it can turn, do aerobatics, and maneuver almost like a spit. Even flying them I shake my head at some of the stuff I can do as I shoot down other planes. I had to laugh when HTC promoted that video on their website "wings of prey" showing all the crazy moves that a jug couldn't do. Proof of how bad this game has gotten. AH2 has been slowly moving from a good flight sim to an arcade game and that video just proved it. So like the P-47's, many of the planes are not taught on how a plane really flies (which many real pilots know here) but teach what it does in this pinball machine game. Thinking about sending quarters as my payment from now on.
Also, having flown the F4U models from the beginning, since that was our main plane in the Marine Air Wing, have noticed a big change in it as well. It was a "hog" flying and modeled correctly. Even using flaps we didn't attempt what can be done today. So I guess many things have changed to attract and keep more customers. Maybe good business sense but unfortunate to see happen to what was a good flight sim.
:salute
There is NOTHING even remotely arcade about this airplane. Heck, as a Jug flyer, I know damn too well the cons I must not engage or keep up with an experienced stick (in rides such as F4U, K4, P38, Spit8-9). Oh and its not "Birds of Prey". Never thought my video would be used as proof that HTC's physics where more flawed than Microsoft flight simulator... :noid
-
Lepape I think what viking73 means is that he failed to appreciate the excellent camera work and editing that went into your video as well as the outstanding flying. :aok
-
Lepape I think what viking73 means is that he failed to appreciate the excellent camera work and editing that went into your video as well as the outstanding flying. :aok
Yeah and because of that, you now have an avatar with an F4U flying backwards... :rofl
-
Well you know my problem... too much levity, not enough gravity. :devil
-
Really, that was one of the first things I learned when I started out as a trainer. The vast majority of people who "want to learn to fly a <insert plane>" really just need work on technique. Once you know the techniques, the actual plane choice means much less. Once you know the technique, you can hop into almost anything and do pretty dang good.
Amen brotha!
-
i love my P47 i think its jussst right :)
-
Things like real world pilot limitation, flight time and pilot know how.
many wII flight sim junkies have more *virtual flight time* and "oopse dont do that's" than any pilot flying in wII could ever have, simply put, we know how to fly dem's planes yo.
OH, and the lack of wind, jacks things up, makes that controled roller coaster ride effect..meh.
-
um no
a jug with wep and full flaps most certainly has the power to pull itself around...
no magic involved f4u's can do the same
Bulldog
-
Mustangs :noid
-
And the P-47 is outclimbed and out-turned (badly) by all sorts of 109s. Just compare climb rates and turn raddii at DokGonzo's website if you don't believe me. So its all good. Cancel the emergency.
I only mentioned the Spit due to it's history of ability to turn fight. I fly all types of aircraft and the Spit is the least. Like I said, I know the Corsair from years of flying it almost exclusively in the MAW. It did not do what it does today.
Ok you wanted data. Here is performance info by the USAAF PROOF DEPARTMENT, TACTICAL COMBAT SECTION, ARMY AIR FORCES PROVING GROUND COMMAND, EGLIN FIELD, FLORIDA
FINAL REPORT ON TACTICAL SUITABILITY OF THE P-47C-1 TYPE AIRCRAFT
18 December 1942
(e) In close fighting the P-47C-1, due to its faster aileron roll, can quickly reverse turn and break off the combat almost at will. However, due to the large turning circle and low rate of climb, it is deemed inadvisable to attempt to dog fight with any type of enemy fighter now used in the combat area.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47c-tactical-trials.html)
-
wow 50lbs of force! so at 5gs, that would be 250lbs of force? Thats a tremendous amount of force to pull when sitting down and not having much leverage. Modern fighters hit as much as 9g for short periods so that would be 450lbs... is that even possible for most people? (most pilots weren't build like Arnold Schwarzenegger).
err... my math is probably wrong, is the 50lbs is close to constant, and only the weight of the 'arm' changes with the Gs?
G forces pull DOWN (towards plane's floorboards). Sticks get pushed SIDEWAYS. But yes, sucks very much when you pull a muscle trying to lift foaming mug of favorite brew to mouth while in high G-turn!!!!
-
The link you provided is not run by the USAF, not the old USAAC or USAAF.
Based on this thread it's probably a good thing you don't post more often.
Do you even play anymore?
That website is that of Mike Williams and Neil Stirling. It is the single best resource on the web for actual flight data of WWII aircraft. Their site is recognized by the aviation writer's community as one of the finest sources anywhere. The report in question was written by "TACTICAL COMBAT SECTION ARMY AIR FORCES PROVING GROUND COMMAND, EGLIN FIELD, FLORIDA".
Whether or not the site is owned by the Air Force or a private party is irrelevant. The data is that recorded by the USAAF during tactical trials.
-
Be sure Widewing, the documents on Mike and Neil's site must be bogus. :devil There was no Brig Gen named Muir S. Fairchild either.