Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: hlbly on August 22, 2012, 05:49:28 AM
-
Was looking for info on gyro gun sight . Found some really interesting reports . I have seen in the past where these types of reports are not looked on favorably here . I was wondering why ? I would like to hear from people that are respected but not directly associated with HTC . For example , I respect both Delirium , and Corkey/Dan/Guppy . I would really like to hear from Dan , because Del is a trainer . Fugitive and Karnak are another good example both highly respected by me . I prefer Karnak over Fug for same reason . The report does not jibe with our flight model it seems to me . Not being just a little different but radically different in some important areas . Here is a link to the report I am referencing .
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html)
-
:)
-
the only thing in there that surprised me was that the XIV rolled slightly better than the P51 (maybe it does, hardly ever fly ponies), otherwise it all sounds consistent with the AH XIV as far as I can tell.
which parts do you think are radically different?
-
Here is the one that really hit me .
"Manoeuvrablility- The elevator control of the Spitfire XIV was found to be much heavier than that of the Spitfire VIII, unpleasantlly so, and the other controls felt to be slightly heavier than on previous Spitfire Mks. In spite of heavier controls the Spitfire XIV is more manoeuvrable than the Spitfire VIII in turns at all heights. Spins were carried out in the Spitfire XIV at 25,000 feet. The aircraft did not spin voluntarily but had to be put into and held in the spin. Instead of spinning in the normal nose down attitude, the nose of the aircraft oscillated from an almost verticle position downwards to a position with the nose well above the horizon, so that the aircraft was tail down. It spent most of its time in this flat position from which, after four turns, recovery was fast by the normal method or slower if the controls were released. It never appears to become uncontrollable.
Try to recover when you have a XIV in the dreaded tail down spin . The aircraft did not spin voluntarily ????? Once in a spin it has to be held ?????
-
if you mean the tail-down kind you get from an accelerated stall, yeah its tricky and takes alot of alt but it is recoverable (unlike the spit I where you have useless ailerons and no power to help you out.) I wonder if thats the same spin they are describing?
I havent found the XIV very much harder to recover than the others (the increased elevator force needed in the XIV should make it more difficult), although it does seem to happen alot more often because you get less warning and a more sudden departure, and because it is less stable so the nose can bounce into the stall (which is all consistent with the report.) the extra torque and generally fighting LH turns in a RH turning fighter can also increase the risk of departure.
I do suspect that the instability and wandering nose are a little overmodelled in AH, it should be there but not as bad IMO.
-
Both spit XIV and TA152 handle worst at the altitudes they were known to be champions but handle like champions at low level.
-
Both spit XIV and TA152 handle worst at the altitudes they were known to be champions but handle like champions at low level.
What??
-
Both spit XIV and TA152 handle worst at the altitudes they were known to be champions but handle like champions at low level.
icepac has been flying on the moon where gravity does not exsist XD
-
What I mean is that a yak9 at 35,000 feet is more stable as compared to a TA152 or Spit XIV which wallow badly.
At lower altitudes, they are fine.
-
What??
Scratching my head too... :headscratch:
-
Spend some time up there.
-
Both spit XIV and TA152 handle worst at the altitudes they were known to be champions but handle like champions at low level.
I had to post this becasue its so wrong
(http://i46.tinypic.com/14bp26a.jpg)
-
5 posts before the inevitable hijack. wtg :rolleyes:
-
I kinda agree with Icepac... If you manage to slow down the handling of the Ta-152 is horrible at 40k (flew up there in FSO) Keeping it above 300 you are fine....compared to 30k in a Yak where I danced all over a flight of 190s in FSO... they were stalling out and I was just zipping around like nothing.
-
I've often thought of spit pilots as unstable. :D
-
what the F does the 152 have to do with the XIV's stability and how its modelled in AH?
dont worry I'll answer for you. NOTHING AT ALL.
-
what the F does the 152 have to do with the XIV's stability and how its modelled in AH?
dont worry I'll answer for you. NOTHING AT ALL.
:rofl :rofl
-
valuable contribution, thanks :rolleyes:
-
First of all, what the hell are you doing at 30K? Last time i was up there was in an FSO, and the 152 worked excellent for me, i can tell you.
Then, well if you think the 152 is steady and handles well at low alts, youre either a masochist or know nothing about other aircrafts.
Finally, the spit14 handles very "stiff" at low altitudes, compared to other aircrafts. Its due its light airframe - very powerful engine - relatively high aspect ratio combination.
True, i have never been above 15k in a spit14.
Btw Hlbly's report is more than interesting. Physically thinking, those results would be next to inpossible (vs the spit9), but i can never know...
-
:rofl
-
Spitfire Mk XIV doesnt even come into its own until its above 23k. From 23k until about 32k its pretty much on its own terms. Despite all the derision you get from the know-it-all furball moonbats you do get actions above 32k. It wasnt too long ago a wings-of-teens dweeb got his 17s shot down at 37k. Really thats 152 territory and the Spit XIV handles more like a competition sailplane than a fighter when its that high. The power is really marginal.
If you like killing B29s at high altitude the Spit 14 is not the best plane for it. Killing fighters is another story. In its own realm there is no way on earth a Spit VIII is going to turn with it for very long.
-
and thats relevant how? :headscratch:
-
Spitfire Mk XIV doesnt even come into its own until its above 23k. From 23k until about 32k its pretty much on its own terms. Despite all the derision you get from the know-it-all furball moonbats you do get actions above 32k. It wasnt too long ago a wings-of-teens dweeb got his 17s shot down at 37k. Really thats 152 territory and the Spit XIV handles more like a competition sailplane than a fighter when its that high. The power is really marginal.
If you like killing B29s at high altitude the Spit 14 is not the best plane for it. Killing fighters is another story. In its own realm there is no way on earth a Spit VIII is going to turn with it for very long.
I did manage to intercept some B-29s at about 35,000ft in the Spitfire Mk XIV the other night, but I was unable to set up anything that wouldn't have been a suicide attack so all I got to do was wave at them, and get lightly pinged when I got a bit close while trying to set up an attack.
-
I mentioned the TA152 because it also supposed to be a champion at high altitudes much like the spit XIV yet neither handle as well as a yak9 over 30,000 feet.
Sure, they are faster but it's strange that a yak9 is more stable a gun platform at 30,000 feet than two planes that were specifically built for high altitude interception.
I had no trouble lining up b29s at 36,000 feet in the yak but it was unbelievably difficult in both the ta152 and the spit XIV.
I flew the spit VIII at 38,000 feet to bait 163s and checked how it handled at 30,000 feet to find it felt better than a ta152 at 30,000 feet.
I feel the reason for the chiding is the fact that many won't fly as high as I do much like they will never get within 90mph of the speeds I drive cars.
They just don't do it and I do.
-
I disagree icepac. I think the Yak suffers at high alt and the Spit XIV and Ta152 come into their own. If you really want a killer at that alt the November and Mike models are very strong contenders.
This B-29 came across at 29,700. My friends and I went after him without realizing what precisely it was we would be chasing. Had we known we might have launched from other fields. B-29s at altitude can be very difficult to catch. You can forget using a Yak.
http://youtu.be/vYhlUsMXdn4
-
Karnak do you know why these type of reports tend to be over discredited here ?
-
Karnak do you know why these type of reports tend to be over discredited here ?
That report seems to be of a very general type explaining basically what the pilot ought to expect without giving exact numbers. Geeks like exact numbers. Exact numbers allow for easy calculations. "Turns better than a Tempest" doesn't allow for much as it doesn't really tell us how much better, just that it is better.
-
I disagree icepac. I think the Yak suffers at high alt and the Spit XIV and Ta152 come into their own. If you really want a killer at that alt the November and Mike models are very strong contenders.
This B-29 came across at 29,700. My friends and I went after him without realizing what precisely it was we would be chasing. Had we known we might have launched from other fields. B-29s at altitude can be very difficult to catch. You can forget using a Yak.
http://youtu.be/vYhlUsMXdn4
I was able to make multiple passes at 34,000 feet in a yak.
-
I wouldnt say they are discredited at all, they are just treated for what they are - qualitative reports. the best you can do is judge if they tally with your own experience of the aircraft in AH.
-
The conclusions from this article were more than enough for real people fighting in a real war without the luxury of unlimited lives, begining to end films of every sortie, and a dueling instructor to fly a few rounds with after every mission to figure out what went wrong.
By the time you acheived combat pilot status in WW2 there was some expectation that you were able to read these reports and make use of the information and test pilot conclusions. Kind of like reading the manual for a new plane befor you take the check ride.
I knew a real life pilot who didn't for a new plane he purchased becasue he felt he had enough hours to hop in any single engined plane and go. He had money, a stable of cars, and aircraft restoration projects. He made a hole in a Kansas corn feild becasue he didn't read the updated circular for his new purchase about a control tube iceing problem above 7k. The summer befor that he gave me a ride in one of his T-28s. We chased holstiens around in a feild and a school bus by accident pulling up too low at the edge of the pasture near Harrisburg Pa.
I enjoy Hitech's trees in this game becasue they always give me flash backs to that moment when we pulled too much E near the ground chasing those cows and only just cleared the trees leveling out on that school bus's 6 before passing over it while slowly climbing away.
-
I was able to make multiple passes at 34,000 feet in a yak.
The Yak 9U is only 20mph faster than the B-29 at that altitude. On the other hand the Spit XIV is 50mph faster. At 20mph advantage once you make one pass it is going to take four sectors to get out in front again.
Just saying.
-
If you think that b29 interception is simply getting to co-altitude and chasing, you are mistaken.
Ask Triton1 about the Yak9 that intercepted him multiple times on the same 36,000 foot bomb run.
Sure he shot me down both times but I made many passes landing a ton of hits even with a "not so good" lead up to the interceptions.
Had I survived the two sorties I used to go after Triton1, I'm sure waiting a few minutes would have garnered a few more kills because of the damage inflicted.
I understand what is required to make these interceptions and maybe that is why I have 5 times as many b29 kills as you do.......while only concentrating on b29s for one afternoon.
-
If you mean you have more than I do for August?... not doing that this month. :D
If you mean since the B29 came out? Think again.
-
Karnak do you know why these type of reports tend to be over discredited here ?
hlbly,I wouldnt say they are discredited but they must be qualified. The spit IX in question had which engine? Was it an LFIX an FIX or a HFIX all of which had different motors and different FTH's.
I suspect the IX in question was more like our XVI than our IX but without the paticulars I'm only guessing.
As for our spit XIV,well if it was modeled with 150 fuel I think it would be more representative of what the RL XIV was like. One thing I read in that report that struck me as strange was the bit about turning left better,now I might have misread that,I often do dislexia is a wonderful gift,but other than that it seems to be pretty close.
YMMV.
:salute
-
That report seems to be of a very general type explaining basically what the pilot ought to expect without giving exact numbers. Geeks like exact numbers. Exact numbers allow for easy calculations. "Turns better than a Tempest" doesn't allow for much as it doesn't really tell us how much better, just that it is better.
Okay i see your point . If how ever lets say for arguments sake the tempest turned better at every possible altitude and configuration . Would it still be dismissed ? Just trying to learn here .
-
I kinda agree with Icepac... If you manage to slow down the handling of the Ta-152 is horrible at 40k (flew up there in FSO) Keeping it above 300 you are fine....compared to 30k in a Yak where I danced all over a flight of 190s in FSO... they were stalling out and I was just zipping around like nothing.
Wonders how you did that since most FSOs have a ALT cap?
-
Okay i see your point . If how ever lets say for arguments sake the tempest turned better at every possible altitude and configuration . Would it still be dismissed ? Just trying to learn here .
Dismissed isn't really the right word. The data is looked at and used as a general reference, but it cannot be used to get exact predictions. No: The Spitfire Mk XIV has a 650 meter turn radius and the Tempest Mk V has a 704 meter turn radius at 5,000ft.
-
Dismissed isn't really the right word. The data is looked at and used as a general reference, but it cannot be used to get exact predictions. No: The Spitfire Mk XIV has a 650 meter turn radius and the Tempest Mk V has a 704 meter turn radius at 5,000ft.
Thnx Karnak . BTW what is your in game name ?
-
Thnx Karnak . BTW what is your in game name ?
Karnak.
I hardly play nowadays though.
-
There are three planes that I suspect on having too high propeller masses; Ta152, I-16 and Spitfire Mk.XIV. It is very hard for me to explicitly prove it but based on the handling characteristics (excessive gyroscopic yaw) of these planes and the contrast compared to the rest of the planeset, that's the conclusion I've arrived to.
If that indeed is the case, reduction of the prop masses would improve the handling chracteristics of these planes quite significantly. It wouldn't cure the rather marginal directional stability of a Ta152 itself for example but it would make it much less of a nuisance.
-
There are three planes that I suspect on having too high propeller masses; Ta152, I-16 and Spitfire Mk.XIV. It is very hard for me to explicitly prove it but based on the handling characteristics (excessive gyroscopic yaw) of these planes and the contrast compared to the rest of the planeset, that's the conclusion I've arrived to.
If that indeed is the case, reduction of the prop masses would improve the handling chracteristics of these planes quite significantly. It wouldn't cure the rather marginal directional stability of a Ta152 itself for example but it would make it much less of a nuisance.
Your theory could explain why those particular torque monsters have a signifigantly more tempermental yaw instability/characteristic in AH than most any of the other plane you compare them to... and also I agree with you, it shouldn't "cure" their inherant directional instabilities, but perhaps make them a load less agressive/tempermental/indusive.
Interesting thread.