Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: Latrobe on October 07, 2013, 10:51:04 PM
-
Posted this in the squad forums, but thought it might be good material for everyone since I hear a lot of complaints about about people dying to Head On passes. It's my explanation on how to always successfully avoid the HO shot.
To avoid a HO pass what you want to do is create HORIZONTAL and VERTICAL separation from your attacker. You do not want to put your nose on him, but instead put it off to his side, below/above him, or (best positioning) off his side AND below/above. You want to set yourself up to get into a part of the airspace that he can not get guns to. You don't (ever) want to fly into your opponents guns unless you're making a Head On Shot that you know without a doubt that you will win. Like a Mossi versus a Zeke. (But even then, it only takes 1 lucky bullet to kill the pilot, so use extreme caution in Head On passes).
Here we have an enemy P-51 making a Head On pass with us. There is no horizontal separation (nor any vertical either) so the P-51 has an easy time putting guns on us.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview1_zps3af0cafa.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview1_zps3af0cafa.png.html)
Let's take this one step at a time and start with HORIZONTAL separation. Here is our current path flying nose to nose with the P-51.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview3_zps5940d961.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview3_zps5940d961.png.html)
If we continue this flight path then obviously the P-51 will have guns on us.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview4_zps2c030b68.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview4_zps2c030b68.png.html)
We need to create some horizontal separation from this P-51, and we do that by banking to the left or right of him. Not a full turn or even 90 degrees. Usually 20-30 degrees is enough to create the horizontal separation we need.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview5_zpsa06ef6dd.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview5_zpsa06ef6dd.png.html)
This simple turn completely changes the angle for the P-51. We are no longer in his guns (for this brief moment anyways). The P-51 has to change his flight path in order to pull lead on us and get a shot. This also no longer puts us nose to nose with the P-51. He's now in our 1-2 o'clock area. The P-51 will turn into our turn and 1 of 2 things will happen.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview6_zps8a864622.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview6_zps8a864622.png.html)
Either 1: You timed your turn just right and you will be past the P-51 before he has time to correct his flight path and pull lead...
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview7_zps51789964.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview7_zps51789964.png.html)
If the P-51 tries to make the turn then he will overshoot and you will be in a good position to reverse your turn and instantly go on the attack.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview8_zps9ddfece4.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview8_zps9ddfece4.png.html)
OR 2: The P-51 has time to correct his flight path and starts to pull lead lead on you. In this case you really do not want to try and tighten your turn anymore since this will expose your 6 to the P-51 (If he has time to correct his flight path then he obviously hasn't overshot yet. A tighter turn just puts you in his gunsight.) What you want to do in this case is reverse your turn. We have created a small horizontal problem for the P-51 with our first turn by putting him off our 1-2 o'clock instead of our 12. Reversing our turn completely changes the angle on the P-51 in the opposite direction.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview9_zps4c4b3483.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview9_zps4c4b3483.png.html)
The P-51 will have to roll back the other way and pull a lot of G's to even have a hope of getting even a short shot at us. Take a look at where the P-51 has to aim when we broke left, and then look how far in the other direction he has to aim when we simply reverse our turn. What was a shot on his 12 o'clock is now off to his 9 o'clock. The closure rate in a Head On pass and the distant between the two planes by this point means the P-51 will never make that turn. This is how to set yourself up to get to a part of the airspace that your opponent can't shoot at.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HOTopview10_zpsf1305e1e.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HOTopview10_zpsf1305e1e.png.html)
Of course, a plane isn't limited to horizontal moves. We have the vertical to exploit these little angles with as well. Just like how we can go left or right in the horizontal, we can also go up or down in the vertical. In this diagram we go nose down to put the angle below the P-51. The P-51 sees this and noses down too to try and get his shot. Now we're creating angles! We are no longer nose to nose, but the P-51 nosing down has put us back in his guns, so we'll nose down some more and create and even sharper angle for him. The P-51 has to push his nose down even farther to get a shot and this creates an even sharper angle than before. As the P-51 is diving steeper to get a shot and gets close to guns range (600-400 icon range) we pull back on the stick and go from a dive to a climb. This drastically changes the point where the P-51 has to aim to land hits. Look at where he has to aim from points 2-3. At point 2 he has corrected his attack run against our slight dive and has guns on us, BUT we have started creating angles. At point 2.5 as we steepen our dive and pass below the P-51 we can see the point of aim for the P-51 is getting farther and farther behind his flight path. So, he has to dive steeper and steeper in order to pull lead on us. We wait until he gets close to guns range and then we pull back on the stick, changing from a dive to a climb and this dramatically changes the point of aim for the P-51 from a steep angle below him to nearly right behind him. There is no physical way for the P-51 to pull his aircraft around tight enough to get that shot.
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n101/Latrobe_2006/HoVertical_zpsb3f8a4ff.png) (http://s110.photobucket.com/user/Latrobe_2006/media/HoVertical_zpsb3f8a4ff.png.html)
These images are far from accurate scaling but hopefully you get what I was getting at.
This is just one example both horizontal and vertical separation. Vertically, instead of going into a dive, we could have gone into a climb and done the same thing as we did in a dive... just in a climb. Or, at point 2 of our dive we could have reversed our dive into a climb at that point and change the angle there. It all really depends on the situation and what you feel will bring you the greatest success. Whatever you choose to do though, it's alwasy best to create vertical AND horizontal separation from your opponent if at all possible. This give your opponent 2 angles to deal with and all the problems that come with them.
-
Thanks latrobe :aok will try this
-
Too complicated. I just put my aim dot on the bad guy and hold the trigger till someone dies. Let's face it, most of us just want that one kill before we die in the hope of reaching the coveted 1 K/D.
-
Well done. I need to work on the combination vertical and horizontal separation.
Question. If the mustang had not attempted to solve the angle problem and had turned up and away to create his or her own vertical and horizontal separation, the mustang would have the temporary E advantage and with lower speed a better turn rate. How would you counter that? I run into this problem when the attacker is one of the better players.
-
If the mustang went vertical instead of for the HO shot then it depends on the situation. How much E both planes had and what plane you're flying plays an important part in deciding what to do. In this match up it's a P-51D vs 109G14 and the P-51 had a small E advantage into the merge. If the P-51 went vertical then he converts that E into altitude and gains the altitude advantage. For the 109, trying to turn onto the P-51s 6 is a bad move. He will bleed too much E in the turn and the P-51 already has a small E advantage. The P-51 will easily out climb the 109 and kill him as he stalls. What I personally would do against the P-51 going vertical is I'd extend away from him and go into a shallow climb while keeping enough E to maneuver for when the P-51 makes an attack run. If the P-51 makes an attack run then I'll turn into him, nose down under him, avoid his shot, and start climbing away from him the other way. What I want to do is either dodge his shots long enough to climb to his altitude and neutralize his altitude advantage, or wait him out until he makes a mistake and comes down to my altitude or gives me a shot.
Speed is life, but altitude dictates the fight. If you have the altitude advantage then you get to choose when and where to start the fight. The enemy(s) below you, even if they have the speed advantage, are not too much of an immediate threat to you. They have to climb to you and use up that E advantage they have to get altitude. They'll either stall out before they climb to you or once they do get to your altitude you have the speed advantage.
Another situation involving your opponent going into a climb instead of for the HO shot. Lets say you're flying a 109K4 and you're merging with an A6M. You're cruising at 350mph and we can assume the A6M is at about 300mph. The 109K4 has a significant climbing advantage over the A6M. We make our turn and put our nose off to the side of the zeke and we see he doesn't appear to be adjusting for a head on shot. As we pass we see the zeke nose up possibly to do an immelman and came back around onto our 6. What I'd do is pull back slowly into a gentle climb (kind of like what I explained earlier but the climb gradually gets steeper here as I go into steep climb straight up). We know we have the speed advantage over the zeke and a climb advantage, but the zeke is a better turner. We do a gentle climb first to get the zeke to burn a lot of E making his loop and so we get some separation from him so he's not sitting 400 yards off our 6 as we climb. As the zeke gets to the top of his loop he should be roughly 600-800 icon range and we'll gradually steepen our climb and put our E and climbing advantage to use. When the zeke rolls over and starts trying to climb with us we pull back some more and climb nearly straight up. The zeke will be about 800 off our tail (just outside of effective guns range) and we'll be climb away from him with our E and climbing advantage. Now we have the altitude advantage and can either kill him in our rope or BnZ tactics if we miss our he breaks off.
-
The simplest way to avoid HOs is to head directly towards the guy until just outside the range where he will open fire (maybe 1000 yards). Then pull hard to one side. They don't have time to roll to that side and pull adequate lead, so they always miss. No diagrams needed.
MH
-
The simplest way to avoid HOs is to head directly towards the guy until just outside the range where he will open fire (maybe 1000 yards). Then pull hard to one side. They don't have time to roll to that side and pull adequate lead, so they always miss. No diagrams needed.
MH
It can be done, but it burns a buttload of E. Latrobe's description here is a much smoother technique that gives you far better position and E state while accomplishing the same thing.
Wiley.
-
Great write-up! +10
I believe I started doing this without even realizing I was performing the maneuver. Anytime you can force your opponent into hard (tight) angles, you have a better chance at surviving the attack. Also, I find turning your aircraft so that your profile is the side to the attacker. This minimizes the target area for your attack to hit.
Great visual aids!
-
It can be done, but it burns a buttload of E. Latrobe's description here is a much smoother technique that gives you far better position and E state while accomplishing the same thing.
Wiley.
It burns his to the same degree, IMHO. Also, it puts you in a different plane of maneuver when you go up, which disorients many opponents.
MH
-
how to avoid the HO?
Don't put your nose on the other guy and expect him to do the same. :aok
-
It burns his to the same degree, IMHO. Also, it puts you in a different plane of maneuver when you go up, which disorients many opponents.
MH
Assuming he pulls for you. If he retains his E, you're now at a disadvantage.
Like I said, it's possible and necessary sometimes if you're caught unaware, I'm just saying if you don't have to, it shouldn't be plan A.
Wiley.
-
The simplest way to avoid HOs is to head directly towards the guy until just outside the range where he will open fire (maybe 1000 yards). Then pull hard to one side. They don't have time to roll to that side and pull adequate lead, so they always miss. No diagrams needed.
MH
This is not true. It sure is simple, but it isn't nearly as effective as you claim. In fact, this was recently proven (by some folks experimenting/testing in the DA) to NOT be a particularly effective way to avoid a HO. A pilot who is a half-way decent shot is likely to hit and even kill you (especially with cannons) if you use this method.
If you fly nose to nose to 1000 yards, you haven't avoided a HO -- you've flown into a HO shot (even if you don't intend to fire). You have probably just been fortunate, in that many of the better pilots (and better shots) usually don't go for the HO shot anyway. I am always more concerned when a pilot flies a HO avoidance path (like Latrobe describes) and obviously intends to go guns cold on the first merge. I tells me I'm probably up against someone better than average.
While Latrobe's explanation may sound too complex for some, it is really quite simple and very effective. Fly for vertical and horizontal separation before the merge and use that separation to avoid more smoothly, while the con pulls harder than you do to get a shot. You'll win a lot of merges this way and not get HO'd as well.
<S>
Ryno
-
This is not true. It sure is simple, but it isn't nearly as effective as you claim. In fact, this was recently proven (by some folks experimenting/testing in the DA) to NOT be a particularly effective way to avoid a HO.
Sorry, squaddie. :salute
The folks experimenting/testing such started out with me and Titanic .... on the deck (which cuts options by half). Most times, a pilot not expecting the dodge at an alt where you can both side-slip and dive a bit will miss. I've just done it so much in both the MA and events that it's not a rare instance, at all. Usually against 109s and Spits. Occasionally against just about any other fighter in the game.
Speaking of which .... I need to fly more (and not in a Hurri). :D
(http://imageshack.us/a/img854/6071/ibcx.png)
The Hurri slips to the side and drops a bit
(http://imageshack.us/a/img826/8861/xocu.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img560/8704/umh0.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img96/843/i3nz.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img199/9238/c7o.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img32/3843/a7w.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img96/2613/tu75.png)
2nd attempt .... 1 minute later
(http://imageshack.us/a/img836/6527/h3vn.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img829/2685/qbs.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img534/9621/cjpy.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img94/5167/stz7.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img42/471/9t5.png)
3rd attempt .... 30 seconds later ... though not so much a HO this time, just another miss and run.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img838/9194/l8hw.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img16/9492/qmrj.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img703/9948/7b4g.png)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img694/6268/z256.png)
-
Latrobe:
In your pic illustration, the HO'n pilot is in a less than avg turner, even at high speeds I wouldn't imagine her rate compares with any 109. Anyhow, I've been thinking about this a lot and using variations of your method. I'm just wondering how much you would use the method (double/two turns) if the opponent were a better turner than what you are in. Seems to me that some of the best turners could still go for the HO and end up with the advantage. I suppose the double turn avoidance would allow extending as the HO'r just lost a lot of kinetic, assuming they're not in a Spit.
Lets say a Corsair vs. A6M, zeke is the HO'r. Co-alt ~ Co-kinetic
Edit: I know a lot of ppl would say just HO the zeke, he'll flame up first, but I'm asking as a baseline. This is a situation that I can attribute to other planes and make adjustments for if I have a baseline. This situation presents itself a lot off of a CV base take. Guy in the Corsair is trying to focus on ack, Zeke is trying to focus on anyway possible to stop the base take...
-
If the HO'er has the better turny plane then the same principle still applies, as far as I can think of anyways. It all comes down to timing and positioning. Against a more turny plane (like an A6M) I would make my reverse at a much closer range (just before the icon changes to 400). Whereas against a less turny plane (such as a P-38) I would reverse my turn a little further out (somewhere around 600 icon range depending on speeds and closure rate). The only plane that might be some trouble is a 190 since its fantastic roll rate allows it to change directions quickly, but again timing and positioning can beat a 190 as well.
I guess I should have pointed out as well that plane strengths and weaknesses can play a role in avoiding a HO shot as well. If you're up against a plane that isn't good in dives and compresses, then you might want to think about using nose down moves to force him to dive, build up speed, and use his bad high speed handling against him so he can't reverse to make the shot. On the other side of the coin we could be going up against a plane that is great in a dive, but loses speed quickly in a climb and has bad low speed handling. In that scenario we'd want to think about using some nose up moves to get him climbing, burn his E off, and get him slow where he can't maneuver as well.
-
Sorry, squaddie. :salute
The folks experimenting/testing such started out with me and Titanic .... on the deck (which cuts options by half). Most times, a pilot not expecting the dodge at an alt where you can both side-slip and dive a bit will miss. I've just done it so much in both the MA and events that it's not a rare instance, at all. Usually against 109s and Spits. Occasionally against just about any other fighter in the game.
Yeah, I think it was I who mentioned that to you, that you were going to have trouble doing that HO avoidance on the deck and against a 110s bullets.
Your example above makes a last minute jinking method easier (mostly because of the plane match ups), but I still think it is important to state that waiting until 1K to offset is NOT the best way to approach a first merge and HO avoidance. Can it be done, yes. Will it work all the time, no. More importantly, it doesn't gain you any E or angles. The post I responded to above said the opponent will "ALWAYS" miss, which simply isn't true. I don't even believe it has a reliably high rate of success, whereas Latrobe's method does.
Since this is the Training Forum, and may be read by newer players, I think it is important to point that out that flying nose to nose to 1000 yards is NOT the BEST way to handle HO avoidance. If you have the option of offsetting prior to that, as Latrobe is presenting here, it is a far superior method in my opinion (for the reasons I stated above) compared to a last second jink.
<S>
Ryno
-
I think it is important to point that out that flying nose to nose to 1000 yards is NOT the BEST way to handle HO avoidance. If you have the option of offsetting prior to that, as Latrobe is presenting here, it is a far superior method in my opinion (for the reasons I stated above) compared to a last second jink.
<S>
Ryno
I think that brings up a rather small but important question that someone may eventually ask. When is the best time to start setting up for avoiding a HO shot (or a merge in general). And the answer is, as soon as possible! The very second you see an enemy, be it at 1000 yards or 5K, you need to immediately assess the situation and maneuver for the merge that will bring you the most success in the situation you are presented with. Even if it's just a dot on the horizon that you don't have icon range one yet, start thinking of what you will do against whatever plane it may be. Is it a P-51? I should get altitude so he can't BnZ me. Is it an i-16? I need to build up speed and use that against him. If you start maneuvering for the merge before your opponent, then you get into position first, and that give you a big advantage into the merge.
-
Ah. Alas, tis seldom I see the player practicing a head-on (which I consider just as valid an attack as any) actually reversing into a knife-fight immediately, so whatever energy they retain versus mine (an advantage they probably already enjoyed). But that initial joust, when I see it coming (ie. not looking over my shoulder at an opponent I'm already engaged with) is neither intimidating or unwanted.
Ole'. :)
I hope this doesn't sound like I'm contradicting you. Upon clarification, I don't think I do. I have taken rare hits (even critical ones). But it's not a crisis. I think we both agree. :salute :cheers:
-
The simplest way to avoid HOs is to head directly towards the guy until just outside the range where he will open fire (maybe 1000 yards). Then pull hard to one side. They don't have time to roll to that side and pull adequate lead, so they always miss. No diagrams needed.
<snip>
This is not true. It sure is simple, but it isn't nearly as effective as you claim. <snip>
<snip>
Your example above makes a last minute jinking method easier (mostly because of the plane match ups), but I still think it is important to state that waiting until 1K to offset is NOT the best way to approach a first merge and HO avoidance. Can it be done, yes. Will it work all the time, no. More importantly, it doesn't gain you any E or angles. The post I responded to above said the opponent will "ALWAYS" miss, which simply isn't true. I don't even believe it has a reliably high rate of success, whereas Latrobe's method does.
Since this is the Training Forum, and may be read by newer players, I think it is important to point that out that flying nose to nose to 1000 yards is NOT the BEST way to handle HO avoidance. If you have the option of offsetting prior to that, as Latrobe is presenting here, it is a far superior method in my opinion (for the reasons I stated above) compared to a last second jink.
<snip>
Hmmm; it has worked for me for the last 10 years. I don't think I have *ever* been hit in a HO when doing this. With respect to energy and angles, there are a lot of variables there, and I wasn't discussing them. Sometimes on a merge you even want to slow down.
MH
-
Hmmm; it has worked for me for the last 10 years. I don't think I have *ever* been hit in a HO when doing this. With respect to energy and angles, there are a lot of variables there, and I wasn't discussing them. Sometimes on a merge you even want to slow down.
MH
I'll take you at your word that you've never been shot doing this. I really think it relies heavily on your opponent either being a pretty poor shot or not anticipating the move.
Then again, maybe the way you are executing it is not how I envision it from your description. It wouldn't surprise me if you have some small bit of offset that allows you to pull it off, even though you are describing it as a nose to nose merge to 1K. Perhaps PM me a few film examples of the next few times you pull this off, especially against a nimble multiple cannon armed plane like a 110, La-7 or a Spitfire. The point of my disputing your post was not to say it couldn't be done, but that it shouldn't be done or relied on all the time.
I still think Latrobe's method of HO-avoidance (instead of a last-second jink) is the BEST method that should be promoted to new players on the training forum.
<S>
Ryno
-
not anticipating the move.
^Likely. Few seem to. As seen in my screenshots, the opponent does seem to apply rudder, as well, but too late to be effective. As far as Deacon's response, I had no ides this form of HO avoidance worked with tanks.
:salute :cheers:
:D
-
Nice write up. It occured to me while reading it that I tend to do all of this stuff when possible as part of an attempt at a good merge. In other words in the attempt at gaining an angular advantage in the merge, the avoidance of the Head On is a happy by product. I do get hit on occasion in the MA but it's typically a result of my being lazy about my merge.
Generally you can see the Head On attempt coming from the other plane just by what they are doing. Obviously no attempt at separation on the merge coupled with their attempt at a nose on flight path no matter what your actions are is a good indication of the other guys plan to HO. This is where the laziness on my part occurs. I generally tend to think E retention during the merge over angles to allow me to catch him or lessen my E disparity and don't maneuver enough as a result and sometimes take hits.
One thing that I don't think has been mentioned is avoiding the Head On passes that frequently occur when you are fighting multiple planes...especially in the case where another red plane joins a fight already in progress. In that case you don't have room (if you're on the deck) or the speed in the case of a longer drawn out fight, for vertical or horizontal separation on the incoming HO attack. In these cases I use a short barrel roll around the incoming HO attack. You don't benefit many times in terms of gaining angles but it is something that can allow you to avoid that one shot and can help minimize angles loss to the plane you're already fighting.
I think comparisons to DA duels and MA furballs is a bit difficult except in terms of what you all have described (practicing situations etc.) In the DA dueling style merges tend to be on the deck and as neutral as possible at the beginning of the fight. In the MA you merge from all angles and any number of differing altitudes and speeds. I think it makes avoiding HO shots in the MA much much easier because the separation is much more available to you. I have noticed that there are a number of folks in the MA who tend to be pretty good at front quarter shots. However the vast majority of that group tend to fall apart once the fight progresses to an angles or sometimes even BNZ style fight.
Zaphod
-
let me summarize this....turn away from the head on and hope for an over shoot?
-
let me summarize this....turn away from the head on and hope for an over shoot?
My summarization would be create seperation and angles however there's more ways to do that than one and you can do it without turning away by much. I'd also say the result, however it's done, is more a fly-by than an overshoot.
It's also valuable to note that however seperation and angles are created if the opponent is commited to the HO you have the immediate advantage after the pass if he turns to fight rather than running away.
Finally, the last minute juke move, while it can work, is the worst option as it usually turns the enemy out of your field of view at a critical point in the merge.
-
Finally, the last minute juke move, while it can work, is the worst option as it usually turns the enemy out of your field of view at a critical point in the merge.
It has never turned the enemy out of my FOV. As I side-slip and dip (one way or the other) the other plane is passing on my high right or high left. At that point I am exercising either a right or left Chandelle.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img21/919/ex0g.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chandelle.gif
-
It has never turned the enemy out of my FOV. As I side-slip and dip (one way or the other) the other plane is passing on my high right or high left. At that point I am exercising either a right or left Chandelle.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img21/919/ex0g.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chandelle.gif
Which is why I said usually rather than always. It depends on which way and how you decide to break. If you (not you specifically) simply tell someone to juke in three dimensions there's more ways to lose sight than to retain it.
-
Good stuff.
I use the same method Latrobe describes and can say I never lose in a HO situation, and I never look for a gun solution in one either - well, not the initial merge anyway.
-
Which is why I said usually rather than always. It depends on which way and how you decide to break. If you (not you specifically) simply tell someone to juke in three dimensions there's more ways to lose sight than to retain it.
Ok. :salute :cheers:
-
Interesting thread !
Btw i ran some tests with the 13mm on D9, as i use it a lot, and with 650m Conv these two weapons are perfect for 400m-500m sniping on HO,
which means that with training u can snipe at 450m, then dodge to avoid enemy fire (which often comes at 300m or less)... :D
کpirit.
-
Good stuff.
I use the same method Latrobe describes and can say I never lose in a HO situation, and I never look for a gun solution in one either - well, not the initial merge anyway.
Never? :noid
-
I always do a high displaced inverted barrel roll. Since coming back, I have yet to be pinged while Doing this.
-
Never? :noid
Well, pretty much :D
-
I always do a high displaced inverted barrel roll. Since coming back, I have yet to be pinged while Doing this.
May I ask what a high displacement "inverted" barrel roll is?
edit: I guess it's displaced not displacement..... I still don't understand this "move".
How do you do it inverted?
:salute
-
May I ask what a high displacement "inverted" barrel roll is?
Sounds like something that would pop a real pilot's head. Barrel-rolling 'cockpit out?'
:salute as well for that type of maneuver
-
Push down on the stick, and "do a barrel roll".
May or may not pop a real pilot's head. I have no idea :noid.
-
Push down on the stick, and "do a barrel roll".
May or may not pop a real pilot's head. I have no idea :noid.
Ok..... :rolleyes: Where exactly does the inverted part come in,or do you enter the merge inverted?
:salute
-
Well, I'm not sure what else you would call it. You're pulling negative g's, not so?
-
Well, I'm not sure what else you would call it. You're pulling negative g's, not so?
Maybe a negative G barrel roll,maybe..... Oh I get it a displaced inverted barrel roll sound like some fancy ACM.
Just last night I asked another trainer where some of these guys come up with some of the terms they want to learn,neither of us had an idea,however now I do!
:salute
PS: ACM doesn't stand for always can make it up!
-
:salute
-
Maybe a negative G barrel roll,maybe..... Oh I get it a displaced inverted barrel roll sound like some fancy ACM.
Just last night I asked another trainer where some of these guys come up with some of the terms they want to learn,neither of us had an idea,however now I do!
:salute
PS: ACM doesn't stand for always can make it up!
Oh, I had no idea. I always figured people just threw words together and came out with some fancy-shmancy move that worked. Thanks, ever so much for your enlightening words of wisdom. :rolleyes:.
I get the feeling you take either yourself or life in general a bit too seriously. Lighten up, and try not to be so sarcastic whenever you open your mouth, so to speak.
-
Oh, I had no idea. I always figured people just threw words together and came out with some fancy-shmancy move that worked. Thanks, ever so much for your enlightening words of wisdom. :rolleyes:.
I get the feeling you take either yourself or life in general a bit too seriously. Lighten up, and try not to be so sarcastic whenever you open your mouth, so to speak.
Hmmm... I got the feeling the trainer was trying to keep the nonsense out of the training forum. <Shrug>
-
It's not unusual to see creative terminology here. We talk about inside and outside loops, we could say tank-ace is doing an outside barrel roll but neg G barrel roll works as well.
I generally lead turn on a merge and that usually defeats the head on shot.
-
Hmmm... I got the feeling the trainer was trying to keep the nonsense out of the training forum. <Shrug>
Then he could do that, and just that. Tell me that it inverted doesn't make sense in that context, and what a better term would be. But this....Oh I get it a displaced inverted barrel roll sound like some fancy ACM.
Just last night I asked another trainer where some of these guys come up with some of the terms they want to learn,neither of us had an idea,however now I do!
salute
PS: ACM doesn't stand for always can make it up!
Is unnecessary, and obviously meant to be a tad insulting.
-
I always do a high displaced inverted barrel roll. Since coming back, I have yet to be pinged while Doing this.
I think everyone missed the "HIGH" part, which may better explain how this ACM term was invented.
Then he could do that, and just that. Tell me that it inverted doesn't make sense in that context, and what a better term would be. But this....
Is unnecessary, and obviously meant to be a tad insulting.
I don't think he was trying to insult you. I think he was correctly pointing out that something on the training forum (your post) was a completely made-up and meaningless ACM term. You found that insulting because you posted it.
Look at it from his perspective: Morf has to work with new players who come into the Training Arena asking him questions like "Can you show me how to do a high displaced inverted barrel roll?" At that point he has to figure out what the heck they are talking about and try to get them straightened out, all because somebody made up an ACM term that doesn't exist and posted it on the Training Forum.
That said, it has been pointed out that a barrel roll can help avoid a HO. You were correct in that much.
<S>
Ryno
-
I did a barrel roll (or canopy roll, both would appear to be accurate descriptions of the basic maneuver performed), and there was a large amount of displacement.
After a quick look around, there is no specific name for such a maneuver in which the original heading is maintained. Thus the term "high displacement barrel roll" would be accurate if positive g's were being pulled.
Now, the definition of inverted is "put upside down or in the opposite position, order, or arrangement.". And what I did was the mirror image of a high displacement barrel roll, only with negative g's. Thus the term "inverted" is, if not perfectly fitting, then at least quite close.
There was no ACM pre-established ACM term to describe what I was trying to describe. That is a fact. And because I said "inverted" instead of "negative-g", Feind got upset.
The implication was that I was trying to sound more knowledgeable than I am, and that I was intentionally just making up terms willy nilly. That is unnecessary, and frankly not becoming of a trainer.
-
Then he could do that, and just that. Tell me that it inverted doesn't make sense in that context, and what a better term would be. But this....
Is unnecessary, and obviously meant to be a tad insulting.
I can see from your prospective that you might consider it insulting,sort of in the way a kid with his hand in the cookie jar.
Kingpin hit the nail on the head! I have to deal with it,some player just the other night came into the TA and asked me to show him some fancy move I had no idea of.
Then another player came along and took over telling the first player he could show him how to do the "cobra" from redtails the movie.... :rolleyes:
I cant tell you how many players asked me to show them how to do a tailslide like it was some magic move that wins fights. So I make it a point to show players in the "help and training" forum that a lot of what is said and posted is utter nonsense!
Tank you strung together a couple of words to make it sound like you knew what you were talking about or to make it sound like it. All you needed to say was I enter the merge in a barrel roll,then when a player comes to me and asks how to enter a merge in a barrel roll I'll know or have an idea what they are talking about.
If you think this or my previous posts were personal attacks well you have the option to report to moderator..... feel free to use it.
:salute
-
Hi Jager,
Since you are still defending your made-up ACM term, let me address this as diplomatically as I can. Please try not to get defensive about it. I'm not trying to be a jerk or make you look bad. I'm trying to clear up the misunderstanding here and explain why it happened (which is not entirely what you think).
Based on your earlier descriptions, it sounds like you nose down (apply neg G's) and then do a barrel roll. If so, that is all you need to say. The rest is unnecessary and misleading fluff. Here's why:
I did a barrel roll (or canopy roll, both would appear to be accurate descriptions of the basic maneuver performed), and there was a large amount of displacement.
After a quick look around, there is no specific name for such a maneuver in which the original heading is maintained.
Yes there are terms for this, and you just used them. They are "barrel roll" or "canopy roll", which are displacement rolls in which the original heading is maintained.
Thus the term "high displacement barrel roll" would be accurate if positive g's were being pulled.
No, this is a made-up term and does not exist. You are doing a "barrel roll". If you want to say it is a barrel roll with a large amount of vertical or horizontal displacement, then just say that. The problem with using the term "high displacement" is that a barrel roll by it's very nature is a displacement roll and "high" can mean multiple things (just in this context alone), so it comes off as confusing and unnecessary fluff, not an accurate ACM term.
Now, the definition of inverted is "put upside down or in the opposite position, order, or arrangement.". And what I did was the mirror image of a high displacement barrel roll, only with negative g's. Thus the term "inverted" is, if not perfectly fitting, then at least quite close.
The word "inverted" is the wrong term, even if you think it's close. But it wasn't the only problem with the term you made up.
I'm curious, though, about your claim that this is a completely negative-G maneuver (for which you were using the term inverted). Are you doing a barrel roll while canopy outward during the entire roll? If so, I'd love to see a film of this. Although, I don't see any benefit of doing it negative-G, because the con is passing inside your roll and you (by being canopy out) would be losing sight of the con for most of the maneuver.
What I think you are really describing is pushing negative-G's (nosing down) and then doing a barrel roll. These are two separate simple maneuvers put together. And it is a good "move". In fact, if you had just said: "I just nose down into the merge and then do a wide barrel roll to avoid the HO" it would have been a very good post IMO.
There was no ACM pre-established ACM term to describe what I was trying to describe.
Yes, I think there was. You just didn't know it. So, you felt obliged to make something up. I think you can see now why that is not a good idea on the training forum.
That is a fact. And because I said "inverted" instead of "negative-g", Feind got upset.
The implication was that I was trying to sound more knowledgeable than I am, and that I was intentionally just making up terms willy nilly. That is unnecessary, and frankly not becoming of a trainer.
It isn't "fact" if you are making it up. You did make up a term that had inaccuracies.
You have to remember that this is a real pet peeve of trainers, when people put false or misleading information on the training forum. It IS their job to refute that kind of "information" on the Training Forum. It also is in their best interest to discourage people from posting things they have to refute or correct. Unfortunately, you were on the wrong side of things this time.
I'm not a trainer, but I think what I said was accurate. However, if I posted something incorrect here, I hope someone will correct me, both for my benefit, and more importantly for the benefit of those reading it who may not know better.
For the record, Jager is right about this: a slight nose down followed by a barrel roll can effectively avoid a HO shot.
<S>
Ryno
-
You don't need the correct terminology to post here. Somebody will figure out what you mean to say.
-
You don't need the correct terminology to post here. Somebody will figure out what you mean to say.
So I could post something like 'inverted retro-spin slide' and that might make sense to you? :D
-
So I could post something like 'inverted retro-spin slide' and that might make sense to you? :D
As much as anything else you post. :devil
-
As much as anything else you post. :devil
No no no, don't make it about me. It's all about the terminology. Describe 'inverted retro-spin slide.' :D
-
You don't need the correct terminology to post here.
But it certainly does help. Meaning a barrel roll and calling it a loop, or talking about flap usage when you mean elevator muddles communication.
Calling a rope followed by a torque-induced snaproll an inverted retro-spin slide doesn't help anybody.
Wiley.
-
But it certainly does help. Meaning a barrel roll and calling it a loop, or talking about flap usage when you mean elevator muddles communication.
Calling a rope followed by a torque-induced snaproll an inverted retro-spin slide doesn't help anybody.
Wiley.
Thanks for clearing that up Wiley. :lol
I would hate for a player to not ask a question because he thought he might not use the correct term. You guys are getting it backwards. You come to Help and Training to learn what is correct. You don't need to know the answer before you ask. We want to encourage questions. The last thing we need is another reason for people not to ask them.
-
Thanks for clearing that up Wiley. :lol
I would hate for a player to not ask a question because he thought he might not use the correct term. You guys are getting it backwards. You come to Help and Training to learn what is correct. You don't need to know the answer before you ask. We want to encourage questions. The last thing we need is another reason for people not to ask them.
Nobody is suggesting new players not ask questions. What's being suggested is that veteran players not make up stuff to confuse the new players (and their trainers).
New player: Hey, that was a cool move! What's it called?
Vet player who just recovered from a tumble: It's a 'inverted retro power-slide hammer-twist.'
New player: Let me write that down for practice in the TA with a trainer.
-
Nobody is suggesting new players not ask questions. What's being suggested is that veteran players not make up stuff to confuse the new players (and their trainers).
This.
Wiley.
-
Except what I said actually made some amount of sense, following the actual meaning of the words.
Regardless of what any trainer says, I was not entirely incoherent, and I'd thank you not to make a molehill into Mt. Everest
-
I always do a high displaced inverted barrel roll. Since coming back, I have yet to be pinged while Doing this.
Description of what sounded like a rather complicated and confusing maneuver:
Push down on the stick, and "do a barrel roll".
Having said such - you can't do a barrel-roll while pushing down on the stick.
-
Having said such - you can't do a barrel-roll while pushing down on the stick.
Why not?
-
Why not?
Seriously? Here:
Execution
To do a barrel roll in its purest form, from the pilot's perspective, it may best be thought of as a roll around a point on the horizon that is 45 degrees off the flightpath. Starting from a level flight, the pilot will usually pick such a point on the horizon as a reference, which is typically between the nose and the wing-tip, out the side window (if the plane has side windows). This point can be anything in that area, like a distant lake, mountain peak, or cloud. The pilot will then pull back on the stick, bringing the plane up into a brief climb. As the nose passes through the horizon, the pilot begins to apply aileron input, which is accomplished by easing the stick to either the right or the left. As the airplane rolls it will continue to pitch in the direction of the lift vector. The pilot will need to carefully control the roll rate, keeping the nose 45 degrees off the reference point on the horizon as the nose traces a circle around this spot. Some planes may require rudder input, while most high powered planes will only need to be guided by aileron and elevator control.
When the aircraft has rolled 90 degrees, and the wings are vertical, the nose should be angled about 45 degrees directly above the reference point. As the plane continues to roll upside-down it will begin to level out, and the horizon will appear to rise to meet the nose. When in the completely inverted position, the aircraft should be level and the nose should still be 45 degrees to the side of the reference point, putting it 90 degrees off the original flightpath. As the nose drops through the horizon, the pilot may need to reduce the elevator pressure, to avoid altitude loss by counteracting the force of gravity and the loss of lift. Still keeping the nose 45 degrees off the reference point, the plane should roll into level flight along the same flightpath and at the same altitude at which the maneuver began. If properly performed, the reference point should appear to remain in a fairly stationary position, relative to the plane, while the horizon spins around it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrel_roll
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/23/Rolling_scissors_maneuvering_with_instruction_symbols.jpg)
Rolling scissors
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/High_G_Barrel_roll.jpg/586px-High_G_Barrel_roll.jpg)
A high-G barrel roll, performed over the top and underneath
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Displacement_roll_with_instruction_diagram.PNG)
A displacement roll, providing a reduction in turn radius
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Barrelroll.gif)
A canopy roll
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Lag_displacement_roll.jpg)
A lag roll
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Barrel_roll_attack_with_instruction_diagram.jpg)
Barrel roll attack
Which one of the above involves 'stick down?' :) (This is not a trick question.)
-
I'll post film when I'm done with lectures. It'll be fun to prove Arlo wrong.
-
Except what I said actually made some amount of sense, following the actual meaning of the words.
Regardless of what any trainer says, I was not entirely incoherent, and I'd thank you not to make a molehill into Mt. Everest
Nobody is calling you "incoherent", Jager. The problem is that words don't always have "actual meanings" -- sometimes the same word means different things (just like you pointed out in your definition of "inverted").
That is why ACM terms exist. ACM is a language of well-defined and widely-accepted terms, so that someone can say "Barrel Roll" and people will know precisely what they are describing. In that sense, ACM terms are not just "words". When you string a bunch of words together to sound like an ACM term, you can expect some confusion and possible backlash over it.
In fact, the confusion still remains about what you said you were doing, hence the discussion on negative-G barrel rolls.
I'm curious too and looking forward to seeing your film showing how a barrel roll is done completely neg-G.
<S>
Ryno
-
I'll post film when I'm done with lectures. It'll be fun to prove Arlo wrong.
What exactly am I wrong about? I didn't say you couldn't push your stick forward before a barrel-roll
or after one. But if you're executing a barrel-roll then you aren't pushing your stick forward at that point.
You are doing something else, entirely, if you are pushing your stick forward while rolling your craft.
:salute :cheers: :D
-
its a negative-G barrel roll. The basic movement is the same, just oriented differently for you, perhaps bleeds a bit more E and needs some rudder to help kick you around.
-
its a negative-G barrel roll. The basic movement is the same, just oriented differently for you, perhaps bleeds a bit more E and needs some rudder to help kick you around.
I understand your description (after a few incarnations). It doesn't fit the description of a barrel-roll, however.
"A barrel roll is an aerial maneuver in which an aeroplane makes a complete rotation on its longitudinal axis while following a helical path, approximately maintaining its original direction. It is sometimes described as "a combination of a loop and a roll". The g-force is kept positive (but not constant) on the object throughout the maneuver, commonly between 2–3 g, and no less than 0.5 g."
You're inventing something different, even if based on the actual maneuver you claim it represents. Also, there is no equivalent in real life (and I suspect it's for good reason since even modern day g-suits could not keep you from experiencing a severe red-out in the maneuver you describe).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobatic_maneuver
Anyway, having understood what you are doing to avoid damage from a head-on attack .... why invert your 'barrel roll?'
-
Arlo you are wrong. It's still a barrel roll. It doesn't matter if you pull or push, it's still a loop and roll completed together.
-
its a negative-G barrel roll. The basic movement is the same, just oriented differently for you, perhaps bleeds a bit more E and needs some rudder to help kick you around.
I'll post film when I'm done with lectures. It'll be fun to prove Arlo wrong.
Cool. Can't wait to see the film.
Will it be a combat film, or something you are doing offline?
<S>
Ryno
-
Arlo you are wrong. It's still a barrel roll. It doesn't matter if you pull or push, it's still a loop and roll completed together.
Well thanks for setting me straight. Dunno why military fighter pilots don't practice this maneuver more.
-
Cool. Can't wait to see the film.
Will it be a combat film, or something you are doing offline?
<S>
Ryno
Depends; there has been a severe dearth of fighting during the hours I've been on.
-
Depends; there has been a severe dearth of fighting during the hours I've been on.
I'm certain you can find at least one person who will try to HO you, so you can use this maneuver. There never seems to be a dearth of HO-attempts, even when there's nobody who wants to fight.
If you fly around a base in enemy radar, there's a good chance the first guy who lifts will try to HO you on the first merge (80% if it's a Bish base). :lol
<S>
Ryno
-
Well thanks for setting me straight. Dunno why military fighter pilots don't practice this maneuver more.
Because they have way more sense :)
Not to mention that pilots with blood shot eyes don't look cool, so they don't have much luck with the ladies :)
Now the serious response for anyone reading this who might think negative g is a good idea.
Human tolerance to negative g is much less than positive g so any maneuver you try under negative g will be very much less effective than its positive g counterpart. So much so that nobody ever spends much time experimenting with negative g maneuvers before realizing there is no advantage to be gained from it. I can't imagine any situation in combat when attempting to execute a barrel roll under negative g would be advantageous.
The simple fact is that anything you do with positive g will be more effective.
Situations where negative g might be appropriate include a simple push over, which has numerous applications, a negative g guns defensive and the early stages of a spin recovery.
I suggest that anyone who thinks negative g maneuvers can be used to win fights, needs to spend some time with a trainer, the misconception will be short lived.
Regards
Badboy
-
Im no expert....but I can say I've never run into an cartoon combat situation where I'd do a negative G dive over, say, a split-S.
Gotta agree with Badboy on this one.
-
To be clear, there's only a few minor reasons I do this negative g.
1) cocpit out means less chance of a pilot wound (been a bit of a problem for me).
2) people seem to have a bit more trouble precisely judging lead in the negative g realm.
This means that if they get a guns solution, they're less likely to hit, and if they do hit, I'm less likely to be kicked back to the tower.
-
A simple barrel roll is quite effective, keeps you just as safe and burns far less E than what you keep trying (and keep changing) to describe. A high deflection barrel roll (i.e. wider helix) might be even more effective in certain circumstances. In either case the best option is to retain your original flight path and execute around it, or at least start to.
Nosing down neg G prior to merge is also an effective tactic however the end game is generally a hard loop burning off excess E to gain manouvering ability on your higher E opponent, assuming he stays to fight.
Now, if we were to combine these you'd nose down then use an E retaining barrel role without reversing on your opponent, presumably to disengage. Even at that beginning the barrel role might negate the advantage you gained in nosing down as you might put yourself right in the enemy gunsights as you begin the roll.
So if I have this right now you're saying you do all this "inverted" with the cockpit out in the roll? In ACM inverted means upside down. If you knew this why did you initially try to redefine inverted to mean negative G then switch back to a definition of cockpit-out? At what point do you invert (in it's true ACM meaning) in this manouver?
I really do want to see this film. On the other hand you could just come clean and tell us what you really do instead of chasing yourself deeper into the rabbit hole (even though I find it entertaining).
-
Comment withdrawn.
-
Before deciding to take a hiatus due to extreme frustration, I was running into the problem of my attempts to evade a bounce turning into a HO shot. When an enemy dove down on my six, I turned towards him as I'd been instructed, but he inevitably got a HO shot on me. How do you achieve separation in this instance? Is it better to simply do a quick evasion without turning directly into the con's attack, or is there something else that I was missing.
Contemplating a return, provided I can find a way to mellow out a bit....
-Muzzy.
-
Sorry, got smacked with a surprise chemistry quiz. I can probably get on tonight, but not making any promises.
All depends on how fast I can crank out my math homework, and study for my midterm in that class.
-
Sorry, got smacked with a surprise chemistry quiz. I can probably get on tonight, but not making any promises.
All depends on how fast I can crank out my math homework, and study for my midterm in that class.
I'm confident we all understand.
-
Sorry, got smacked with a surprise chemistry quiz. I can probably get on tonight, but not making any promises.
All depends on how fast I can crank out my math homework, and study for my midterm in that class.
Take your time on your homework, study for your exam and forget the film, Jager.
It's far more important to spend time trying to impress your teachers, whereas spending any time to impress anyone on this forum is utterly unimportant.
:old:
Ryno
-
Before deciding to take a hiatus due to extreme frustration, I was running into the problem of my attempts to evade a bounce turning into a HO shot. When an enemy dove down on my six, I turned towards him as I'd been instructed, but he inevitably got a HO shot on me. How do you achieve separation in this instance? Is it better to simply do a quick evasion without turning directly into the con's attack, or is there something else that I was missing.
Contemplating a return, provided I can find a way to mellow out a bit....
-Muzzy.
Muzzy, I'm no pro but this is one of the first things I was taught in this situation. Nose down a bit to get your speed up (250-300 range) giving your tail to the bad guy. As he closes 3k or so out start a turn to one side or the other. If you spot him late you can nose down in this turn to build speed. As he closes tighten the turn more and more. The idea is to make it look like he is still on your tail but you are forcing him to pull more and more G's to get his lead for a shot. The end game of this move is your wing tip should be pointing at him as he goes to guns (giving him a real small profile). As he passes you can pull back and roll back into his line of flight and if your timing is right, get a shot off as he goes by.
You can do this endlessly, but he can't, eventually he will run out of that extra E he had when he started the attack and being co-E with him your in the fight now. Also, watch him as he over shoots. Some guys try to hit the brakes hard and force you to over shoot so they can drop back in on your tail. If he looks like he is slowing, hit your brakes and keep him in front of your wing line ( 3-9 line).
Don't let the game bother you, It IS a game and you can get all the planes you want.
-
Before deciding to take a hiatus due to extreme frustration, I was running into the problem of my attempts to evade a bounce turning into a HO shot. When an enemy dove down on my six, I turned towards him as I'd been instructed, but he inevitably got a HO shot on me. How do you achieve separation in this instance? Is it better to simply do a quick evasion without turning directly into the con's attack, or is there something else that I was missing.
Contemplating a return, provided I can find a way to mellow out a bit....
-Muzzy.
Since I got firmly involved in this thread, I'll take a shot at this.
With regard to your frustrations, Muzzy, I know the feeling. I’m also taking a break myself for similar reasons and haven’t flown in the MA in weeks. I still try to get in for squad training every once in a while, and I find that participating in events like FSOs, doing practice with my squad and working with others in the TA allows me to take the frustrations of the MA with a grain of salt. I try to think of the MA as a meaningless pick-up game, while FSO is “Friday Night Lights”, if you get my metaphor. Maybe that helps.
As far as your “BnZ evasion turning into a HO” problem, it sounds like you may be turning too soon or turning too sharply into the con, which brings you nose on for the HO. There is both a timing and an angle element you may want to work on.
“Turning into the con” doesn’t necessarily mean turning nose on. It could be just rolling to place your lift vector (up view) on the enemy and slowly turning back into him. When you are sure he is attacking (diving), you start to turn and tighten your turn as he gets closer, then evade sharply as he reaches guns range, preferably with both a horizontal and vertical component. If done correctly, he will have difficulty pulling lead for a shot. Instead, he will usually shoot behind you. Watch some of Vudu’s or Latrobe’s combat films and you will see this is a maneuver they use frequently and successfully.
When I do this, I like to hide some E (initially using a low-G or slightly nose down turn), so I can pull up into the con and then over the top as they pass under and behind me. Often you can get a shot on the con as they climb back up or start to extend. If they go sharply vertical you may wind up with a snap shot at very close range, which can be a kill shot. Even just a few pings on a BnZer might motivate them to just extend and go seek easier prey.
The key to all this is timing, so it is something that needs to be practiced.
As always, the best advice is to get with a trainer and ask to work on BnZ evasion/reversals.
My two cents.
<S>
Ryno
-
Muzzy, I'm no pro but this is one of the first things I was taught in this situation. Nose down a bit to get your speed up (250-300 range) giving your tail to the bad guy. As he closes 3k or so out start a turn to one side or the other. If you spot him late you can nose down in this turn to build speed. As he closes tighten the turn more and more. The idea is to make it look like he is still on your tail but you are forcing him to pull more and more G's to get his lead for a shot. The end game of this move is your wing tip should be pointing at him as he goes to guns (giving him a real small profile). As he passes you can pull back and roll back into his line of flight and if your timing is right, get a shot off as he goes by.
^ This. Otherwise known as a defensive barrel-roll.
-
Thanks for the advice, guys. Now all I need is a new call sign. :salute
-
Thanks for the advice, guys. Now all I need is a new call sign. :salute
Dodger
-
Isn't there already a dodger? :)
-
Isn't there already a dodger? :)
Jinks
-
Zag
BRYM
(Barrel Roll You Missed)
-
Oh I like that last one. :)
-
Some guys try to hit the brakes hard and force you to over shoot so they can drop back in on your tail. If he looks like he is slowing, hit your brakes and keep him in front of your wing line ( 3-9 line).
What is the best way to hit the breaks
-
Some guys try to hit the brakes hard and force you to over shoot so they can drop back in on your tail. If he looks like he is slowing, hit your brakes and keep him in front of your wing line ( 3-9 line).
What is the best way to hit the breaks
Chop your throttle and stomp on your rudders. Adding some elevator and aileron to kinda fly sidewards helps too. The problem is you throw away a lot of "E" doing this. In a 1 vs 1 if you see him do it, then you can get away with it. If there are other cons in the area it may not be a good idea.
Planes with big rudders will do this. F4u's, 109s, P47's all a good at hitting the brakes.
-
Some guys try to hit the brakes hard and force you to over shoot so they can drop back in on your tail. If he looks like he is slowing, hit your brakes and keep him in front of your wing line ( 3-9 line).
What is the best way to hit the breaks
I wouldn't hit the breaks. I'd let them waste their E hitting the brakes and I'd go vertical converting my E into alt which I can then convert back into E when I drop back on their 6. :devil
-
What is the best way to hit the brakes
High G barrel roll is good. Cutting power while turning hard and climbing also works well.
-
I wouldn't hit the breaks. I'd let them waste their E hitting the brakes and I'd go vertical converting my E into alt which I can then convert back into E when I drop back on their 6. :devil
:aok Couldn't have said it better myself.
:salute
-
Bumping this to help someone find it. :salute
-
Take your time on your homework, study for your exam and forget the film, Jager.
It's far more important to spend time trying to impress your teachers, whereas spending any time to impress anyone on this forum is utterly unimportant.
:old:
Ryno
This from Ryno ought to be bumped to the top everyday!
:salute