Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: JunkyII on February 20, 2016, 05:06:55 PM
Title: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 20, 2016, 05:06:55 PM
This is a fight between myself and another pilot in the MA, I won't post his name but he definitely knows how to bend the wings on a P51B better then most I've encountered(Certainly the best I've ran into in the Main Arena). I will be giving my thoughts on the fight and pointing out some things that will help the average MA stick to get better and be able to hang in these types of fights....some of the tips will actually help with any sort of fight like this first one....(Note:This engagement is a 1v1 and the views shown aren't from in game....I'm actually looking all over while this fight is happening....it helps to see the other plane for training purposes)
0:00- Never assume anything about the red guy you are fighting. Normal P51 engagements usually are very stale and don't require any sort of talent to evade BnZ attempts or to get them running scared home....I came in too cocky and arrogant, what I should have done is get more separation, either vertical or horizontal, in order to obtain better angles in the merge. In this case horizontal would have been the best bet, I already have an E advantage from what I could see so maybe a semi flat turn merge would have got me up under his 3-9 line better....I could what if it all day, in the end my E merge worked but my foe recognized it and reset the fight which reflects greatly on the experience of this Aces High vet...most will normally try to perform a double immelmen there only to get caught with their belly up trying to roll it back over.
Fight is reset and we are merging at very low speeds, myself (The P38J) should have an advantage in this fight but by now I know I'm up against someone with some good dueling techniques because 1. I see them all the time in KOTH and the DA and 2. HE ISN'T TAKING HO SHOTS.....both of us have them, WE KNOW THIS....but taking a 50 50 shot isn't what we want in the game....we would rather die after a long drawn out fight then to a joust. Against a good stick like this, I know better then most...it is any given Sunday, mistakes...missed shots are going to happen just got to keep fighting and don't give up.
01:27 I turn nose low and dump E trying to get around faster....what I really did was Co E the fight which set up for a shot that I got lucky he missed. What I should have done was a nose high turn up toward my opponent so I had the position going into the rolling scissors (which ended up more vertical by the end). I did my manuever because at some points you are guessing as to what your opponent is going to do next....he went nose high when I thought he might also dump nose down to get more energy, my hesitation when I saw my guess was wrong is pretty obvious at the 01:27 mark.....when you get into these situations all you can do is keep fighting, an extend would have got my clear of this fight for the time being but would have put him on my 6....I know he is good and that's not where I want a decent pilot waiting to see what I will do next, because at that point all he has to do is counter it, there's not much guessing there.(Maybe in R/L but in here...once someone like Bruv or TC has your complete 6...your chances of getting back are between zero and a missed shot by them)
02:20 I come "over the top" too soon, should have help my nose up a bit longer to insure I got a shot. I got excited and thought I could pull in for one....again I get lucky he missed his shot.
03:15 Notice the slight movements my foe is doing as I get shots(Not stick stirring at all, he is just slightly changing his flight path within the angle he needs to close on a shot on me)....03:15 is a good example but any time I'm about to get a shot he adjusts his flight path....it isn't much but It's enough to throw off people with even the best aim (Grizz actually gave me this advice after duels I had with him 4-5 years ago) If you can imagine 2 lines intersecting the plane...one with the wing (The 3 9 line) and one through the nose to tail (The planes flight path) both of these are where you should be looking to determine what you need or should do next against a foe. The 3 9 line really helps you determine angles...whether to pull lead or lag ect ect...the line through the nose should help you set up shots when the opportunity comes or to get your plane out of theirs when on the defensive.(Pointing your 3 9 line at the nose of an aircraft and keeping it there or in front will save you from a lot of pickers in the MA....I'll see if I can find a good defensive film I have recorded)
Extend that line from the nose forward a few plane lengths, this should be in your mind when your about to shoot, you aim your nose where that imaginary line is then shoot the air where you think bullets and his plane will intersect....having this intersection at your convergence makes for the most lethal shooting.
Feel free to add on, correct, tell me I'm bad or whatever you want. I feel most people (To include many Veteran Aces High players) have never actually experienced this type of fight in their Aces High experience and it would be nice to see more interested in it...the more doing it...the more the fights will happen.
Hope this helps any people wanting to become better at the art of the fight in Aces High. To the trainers, I have a bunch of film I can send your way if you want to review them and post them up to help others get better...you know tell them "don't pull a Junky here" or "finally Junky did something right here" :D (and myself...because yes I do want to be the best :devil )
:salute :salute :salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 20, 2016, 05:32:56 PM
Junky, some good maneuvering. Without knowing your energy state, two areas of improvement come to mind while watching the video. 1. A bit more use of the vertical. Maneuvering appears to be mostly in the horizontal. Again, energy state may have been dictating what you could do. 2. Use of the lift vector while working against the opponent. Have you heard of the "energy egg"? Understanding the energy egg concept in combination with use of your lift vector might help you tighten up the fight.
Overall, good job against the B model. :aok
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 20, 2016, 07:43:16 PM
Junky, some good maneuvering. Without knowing your energy state, two areas of improvement come to mind while watching the video. 1. A bit more use of the vertical. Maneuvering appears to be mostly in the horizontal. Again, energy state may have been dictating what you could do. 2. Use of the lift vector while working against the opponent. Have you heard of the "energy egg"? Understanding the energy egg concept in combination with use of your lift vector might help you tighten up the fight.
Overall, good job against the B model. :aok
Just watched it back...I've been told I use the vertical TOO much before and looking at this film I may have broke that habit and built another.
Yea I check out the trainer section a bit and read into it....I don't learn well from reading or pictures....more of a hands on type/video learner...so I admit I look at it in a completely confused look. I think it was Badboy who had the Rolling scissors GIF on here....now that helped my game a ton years ago.
But I think what your getting at is a more straight vertical manuever instead of turning a bit left or right going vertical?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 20, 2016, 10:09:18 PM
Junky, as you know this is a very fluid time and there are numerous variables to deal with. That being said and not knowing what your energy potential was at the time, there were a couple of times that it looked like a more vertical flight track and adjusting your lift vector in relation to his might have made his job more difficult and given you more of an advantage. Obviously, there has to be energy potential available to go pure vertical, if needed.
As you mentioned, it is difficult to read about it and then put it into play effectively. I too, am very much a hands on learner. Keep at it. You've got a good start. :salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: LCADolby on February 21, 2016, 12:42:20 PM
The merge is where all the issues begin for the P51. There is no attack for him, the merge put him straight on the back foot, out of position and lacking the energy it's defending position from the get go.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 21, 2016, 10:01:55 PM
Dolby makes a good point. The merge typically sets the stage for who's going to get the first shot. That is decided by the state of stored energy potential and proper use of the lift vector to get the other guy in a square corner from the get go. Forcing the opponent to burn energy while you are preserving yours is key to getting the first shot.
Additionally, a time tested rule: "Lose sight, lose fight".
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 22, 2016, 04:57:49 AM
I haven't had a chance to watch the film yet as I'm reading from my phone, but I really enjoy threads like this and hope to see more. I wish HiTech would give us an option to "save as in incognito" because while it is classy of you to scrub the names, from the comments here it seems as though we're missing speeds and other benefits of film viewer.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: DmonSlyr on February 22, 2016, 02:36:20 PM
To me, the P51B was in a defensive position from the start and looked to do a nose down turn to create a merge. I could see that Junky had the E on the first merge, but the P51B tried to get a quick lucky shot off it but then corrected himself by not following even further. Junky was smart by using the E and separation to his advantage in the first Emil. It was actually pretty nice defensive flying by the P51B extending the fight that long after Junky regained the 6. You don't see that too often, so I hope people can take note of that in these types of situations.
Everyone here is correct that a little more verticle may have given the absolute advantage for the win. For example, One part I noticed that could have changed the fight for you was at 1:57. I am guilty of this too sometimes, and there can be a price to pay against really good turny birds with great lift vectors and roll around. Notice how you rolled down over the P51B after the cross in order to pull off a shot, which allowed the P51 to attempt a BRD and almost pulled off the shot around the 2:10 mark. Here, if you would have pulled another Emil over the top, you would have had either a better angle or put the P51 right back on your 12. (After re-reading your initial post, you did point that out yourself actually). If the P51 pulled up for a HO after, you could pull back up, rope, and get the shot coming back down. If it weren't for that one instance, it may have not made the fight as long as it did.
Other than that, excellent flying. Both planes were pushed to the full envelope and Junky held on for the win!
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JOACH1M on February 22, 2016, 04:25:39 PM
Pony B got owned.
I've seen 2 weekers do better...
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: 49Dallas on February 22, 2016, 04:40:14 PM
Nice to see threads like this.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 22, 2016, 05:50:46 PM
lmao it was probably some War Thunder PS4 mouse aim scrub.
These squeekers :devil
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 01:08:17 AM
What's a "great lift vector"?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 06:33:56 AM
"Lift Vector" is the direction in which an aircraft has the most lift potential (aka pulling back on the stick). The term has nothing to do with how well an aircraft turns.
When somebody says "Stay out of their lift vector" it means to angle your plane so that your pursuer cannot simply pull back on the stick for a shot.
Hopefully that clears up any confusion @DmonSlyr @Puma44
After watching the film again IMO both pilots were relying too much on their flaps.. though don't take my word for it as my flying style has evolved quite a bit since I've been playing other sims. The P38 could have easily used its climb rate to gain a bit more E, which means a better turning circle on the down slope. It could have gone the other way too, the P38 was using heavy flaps.. had the P51 noticed he could have tried to gain a bit more E, thus turning the fight in his favor.
Getting low and slow in a stall fight is good and all, it's one of my favorite things to do.. but when it comes down to it, the best way to win a fight is to look for the angles that'll put you on top with more energy.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: DmonSlyr on February 23, 2016, 07:31:40 AM
My apologies, I always read lift vector as a stall to lift ratio. Maybe there is a word for that? So for example, if Junky would have been fighting against a Nik and at 1:57 tried to roll over it after the merge, the Nik would have been able to use its lift to stall ratio to easily roll around on Junky, much better than the P51 could do. Can some planes not have better lift vectors than other? Have you seen the 110 or A20 use the verticle? They can beat most planes in a rolling scissors because of how well they can use lift, ie. How easily it can get the nose back up after coming down during a rolling scissors.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 08:26:58 AM
I'm not very savvy when it comes to all these terms.. but I think "Wing Loading" would be a better place to start. An aircraft with a low wing loading (larger wing area, more lift, slower speed. Think Spitfire/A6M) will turn better than an aircraft with a high wing load (smaller wing area, less lift, faster speed. Think 190/P51)
I highly doubt the 110 and A20 were that maneuverable in real life.. though the A20 is a bit more believable than the 110, I think you could say they're the true UFO's of AH's flight model.
At 1:57 you see Junky is trying to turn hard left into the P51, while he's doing this left turn he also does a bit of a left roll that puts him below the 51. The decision by Junky to follow him like he did allowed the P51 a brief moment to get his nose around for a quick shot, as you see in the film. Had Junky not followed the P51, and instead opted for a high yo yo or any upwards vertical maneuver other than the downwards maneuver he made, he would have denied any gun solution the P51 may have had, and been in a much better position above him afterwards. If timed correctly this maneuver would have worked on a N1K, Spit.. no matter what Junky was fighting against.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 09:42:46 AM
So, what is a "stall to lift ratio"?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 09:58:13 AM
Judging by your previous posts you seem to have an idea of what you're talking about, so I can't tell if you're trolling or being serious?
Violator (DmonSlyr) is referring to the maximum amount of lift (turn rate) an aircraft can sustain before it reaches its critical angle of attack.
No, I'm not trolling at all. He uses made up terms that are more than likely confusing others. I'm just curious as to what he really means. It's impressive that you've come up with an interpretation. But, it's not clear if he understands the terms you've used.
It's obvious you've done some research and know some basics. That is a very important aspect of teaching others.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 10:26:55 AM
One aircraft cannot have a better Lift Vector than another, because the Lift Vector is simply the direction in which an aircraft wing produces lift. While turning, you pull BACK on the stick because it is the direction in which lift pushes your aircraft. If you attempt to turn by pushing FORWARD on the stick, you're going to have a bad time because you're going against the Lift Vector (the direction in which your wings are being pushed by lift.)
The Critical Angle of Attack on the other hand, is the maximum amount of lift a wing can produce (its maximum turn rate) before it begins to lose lift and stall. I believe this is the term Violator is looking for.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 10:41:38 AM
Great explanation. :aok. It's not clear if he understands the terminology and application.
Using less than accurate descriptions and combinations of self made words by one who is "teaching" others is more than likely going to create a lot of confusion and frustration for them.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: LCADolby on February 23, 2016, 10:43:37 AM
Lift is generated by the wing as it moves through the air. It will always be directed perpendicular to the direction of travel when looking from the side and perpendicular to the leading edge of the wing when looking at the plane from the front. The faster a wing is moving through the air, the more lift is generated by that wing. The lift vector is the direction of force applied by your plane’s lifting surfaces, the wing. When someone tells you to “point your lift vector” a certain direction, think of the lift vector as a line coming straight out of the top of your canopy. I must stress that no matter which way the plane is angled, the lift vector is straight out of the top of the canopy.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 11:18:34 AM
This^^
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 23, 2016, 11:23:46 AM
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Randy1 on February 23, 2016, 12:07:08 PM
Vector is not an aviation invention. Vector is a mathematical display of forces. A vector has both direction and length where the length is an indication of magnitude.
As an example, a plane is going straight and level has zero lift vector. That is. the plane has no force to make it go up. Pull back hard on the stick and the length of the lift vector goes up at the same time the force to make the plane go straight shrinks.
Remember hot wheel cars that went through a loop. The vector on the car as it goes through the loop goes down representing centrifugal force. Go too slow and the little car falls off the track at the top of the loop.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 12:12:26 PM
I think we get the idea by now...
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 23, 2016, 12:28:04 PM
Randy1,
Regarding your example of a plane flying straight having zero lift, is incorrect, if it had zero lift, it would there for be flying at zero G, and would gradually go into a nose dive
Planes flying straight and level, are normally flying under a force (think Lift Vector here) of around 1 +G nearly constant...
Correct me if I'm wrong please
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Krupinski on February 23, 2016, 12:33:41 PM
You're right TC, if an aircraft had no force to make it go up, it would fall out of the sky. If you pull back hard on the stick and the force to make your plane go straight shrinks, it's because you decreased engine power, or you're flying a glider.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 23, 2016, 12:53:57 PM
It's obvious you've done some research and know some basics. That is a very important aspect of teaching others.
Another important aspect is not coming across as a jerk, which is what tends to happen when you pull answers out of someone inch by inch on a bbs and lack the self awareness to realize your text is coming across as slathered in derision.
See, now we're all learning something :D
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 23, 2016, 01:27:11 PM
You're right TC, if an aircraft had no force to make it go up, it would fall out of the sky. If you pull back hard on the stick and the force to make your plane go straight shrinks, it's because you decreased engine power, or you're flying a glider.
Actually it's mostly because lift adds drag. The lift vector is not really perpendicular to flight path although it's convenient to think of it that way. It's tilted back a little which is why more lift equals more drag. So, gravity aside, when turn performance is reduced after increasing pitch it's because drag has reduced your speed since, as Dolby mentioned, lift is both speed and AOA.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 23, 2016, 01:30:39 PM
Vector is not an aviation invention. Vector is a mathematical display of forces. A vector has both direction and length where the length is an indication of magnitude.
As an example, a plane is going straight and level has zero lift vector. That is. the plane has no force to make it go up. Pull back hard on the stick and the length of the lift vector goes up at the same time the force to make the plane go straight shrinks.
In level flight isn't the lift vector 1g? So the magnitude is expressed in radial g and the direction is near perpendicular to the flight path?
What we usually mean when we discuss lift vector is plane of maneuver. Flight path and lift vector direction being the 2 lines that define the plane.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 02:18:05 PM
Another important aspect is not coming across as a jerk, which is what tends to happen when you pull answers out of someone inch by inch on a bbs and lack the self awareness to realize your text is coming across as slathered in derision.
See, now we're all learning something :D
I can see how the jist of my question could be misunderstood, and you certainly did. The questions were simple in nature to determine if the basics were understood, followed by discussion of the basics, which the subsequent posts are doing a great job of. Your name calling; unproductive and unnecessary.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 23, 2016, 02:19:51 PM
Ah so you're one of those guys who can teach, but can't be taught. Gotcha :aok
You commented on what others can do to improve their teaching, and I gave you similar feedback. Do with it what you want.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 02:40:09 PM
Oh, I'm very teachable, and learn something new every day. You continue to miss the point though.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 23, 2016, 02:56:04 PM
Not really; I'm letting you know (with the same degree of tact you've shown) what your posts come across as. Not so nice, eh?
There's a better way to say it without alienating your audience.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 23, 2016, 03:07:36 PM
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 23, 2016, 03:24:46 PM
FLS, I maintain that pulling questions out one by one, putting quotation marks around "teaching" when referring to someone else's posts, and saying things like what I quoted make you come across as a jerk. If he really is merely trying to assist then he should revisit his method as I can guarantee I'm not the only one who had this impression. If he wants to lecture people on how they try to assist then he can deal with my commentary on how he assists.
With that said help and training isn't the place for an argument so now that we've all added our value here, I'll bow out.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 23, 2016, 03:44:32 PM
Teaching by asking questions is an old well established and effective teaching tool. It does put you on the spot but it's meant to do that. :D It may be less comforting but it won't take 10 years to learn proper terminology. :old:
Please keep comments on topic. :aok
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 23, 2016, 05:26:39 PM
In level flight isn't the lift vector 1g? So the magnitude is expressed in radial g and the direction is near perpendicular to the flight path?
What we usually mean when we discuss lift vector is plane of maneuver. Flight path and lift vector direction being the 2 lines that define the plane.
^ ^ I was trying to get to this point, but typing on a little "dumbphone" that wants to auto correct everything one types is a headache in of itself.....so I backed up and tried to write it in laymen's terms as short as I possibly could
but as you posted FLS, the Bold Green part above, is most likely what is being discussed or taught prob 90+ % of the time when talking about "Lift Vector"
nice post
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: bustr on February 23, 2016, 06:11:58 PM
Hey Puma, are you the Puma who was a jet combat pilot in the military?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: DmonSlyr on February 23, 2016, 07:06:23 PM
You can talk to people about terminology all day, but if they have no clue what you are even talking about, it does literally nothing for the new trainee. If you cannot make the writing easier to comprehend than all it does is confuse the trainee. Instead of sounding like a dictionary, use examples, tell them when they should pull such manuevers, and how to utilise than maneuver better. Use examples of planes that perform different types of manuevers better. A person who ask for a little bit of help for them to get better in the MA is going to be incredibly confused trying to read Wikipedia about BFM. If they don't know the terminology from the start than reading about each maneuver will make little sense. Many things in air combat lead into each other so you have to know the terms from the start or you won't understand any of it. I notice that the trainers can be a bit vague when resorting to situations. There are no such understandings written down that explain how to succeed in different situations in the AH MA. Just mentioning BFM will help them fly their plane more acrobatically but if they cannot percieve what to do with their SA or how to enter/get away from furballs while using those maneuvers than they won't have much luck.
I mentioned the 110 and Nik because they would have been able to pull up much more quickly at 1:57 and it would have spelled disaster for Junky. You have to be able to identify that or explain the use of verticle in that part of the fight if you want them to learn how to utilize the manuevers properly against other planes. Not just pointing out that he needs to use more verticle because that is simply a vague response that could be missunderstood at any point during the fight.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 23, 2016, 07:11:47 PM
Correct terms are not just better for describing air combat, they are essential for understanding it well enough to talk about it in a useful way for new players.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Ack-Ack on February 23, 2016, 07:22:30 PM
You can talk to people about terminology all day, but if they have no clue what you are even talking about, it does literally nothing for the new trainee.
I'm pretty sure that's the point Puma is trying to impress on you about the improper terminology that you are using. As noted by FLS, it is important for the trainee to know the proper terminology, otherwise it is all for naught.
ack-ack
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 23, 2016, 07:41:52 PM
I'm not very savvy when it comes to all these terms.. but I think "Wing Loading" would be a better place to start. An aircraft with a low wing loading (larger wing area, more lift, slower speed. Think Spitfire/A6M) will turn better than an aircraft with a high wing load (smaller wing area, less lift, faster speed. Think 190/P51)
I highly doubt the 110 and A20 were that maneuverable in real life.. though the A20 is a bit more believable than the 110, I think you could say they're the true UFO's of AH's flight model.
At 1:57 you see Junky is trying to turn hard left into the P51, while he's doing this left turn he also does a bit of a left roll that puts him below the 51. The decision by Junky to follow him like he did allowed the P51 a brief moment to get his nose around for a quick shot, as you see in the film. Had Junky not followed the P51, and instead opted for a high yo yo or any upwards vertical maneuver other than the downwards maneuver he made, he would have denied any gun solution the P51 may have had, and been in a much better position above him afterwards. If timed correctly this maneuver would have worked on a N1K, Spit.. no matter what Junky was fighting against.
At 1:57 I knew I had made the mistake right then and there, knew he would get a shot opportunity if he rolled over correctly...which he did.
As for flaps, that's one area I don't know what exactly I'm doing I just know what seems to work to get my plane to react the way I want it to......flaps are in and out all over the place....when I don't need them to purpose the angle I'm going for I bring them up.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Oldman731 on February 23, 2016, 08:14:45 PM
I'm pretty sure that's the point Puma is trying to impress on you about the improper terminology that you are using. As noted by FLS, it is important for the trainee to know the proper terminology, otherwise it is all for naught.
Agreed. We should all be on the same page.
and Vudak, Puma44 suffers from the old age weakness of trying to explain things simply, step by step. Its how we learned, and as we age, its how we try to teach.
Pity us. Woe woe woe.
- oldman
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 23, 2016, 08:37:42 PM
Give it a rest guys, this is a spill over from another thread so I understand what Vudak is talking about and I know what Puma is trying to do.
Give critique, move on...don't beat around the bush ladies.
Got a film of me in a spit V vs an entire squad(I die, but I hang in there for about 8 minutes of straight bounces).....going to post it tomorrow with another review.
:salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 23, 2016, 08:38:54 PM
Give it a rest guys, this is a spill over from another thread so I understand what Vudak is talking about and I know what Puma is trying to do.
Give critique, move on...don't beat around the bush ladies.
Got a film of me in a spit V vs an entire squad(I die, but I hang in there for about 8 minutes of straight bounces).....going to post it tomorrow with another review.
:salute
Whoa now where the hell do you get off trying to save your own thread and put it back on topic? :cheers:
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 23, 2016, 08:44:35 PM
Hey Puma, are you the Puma who was a jet combat pilot in the military?
Yes Bustr, one in the same and very privileged and lucky to have the experience. Dogfighting being one of the most fun experiences of them all. :salute
I'm pretty sure that's the point Puma is trying to impress on you about the improper terminology that you are using. As noted by FLS, it is important for the trainee to know the proper terminology, otherwise it is all for naught.
ack-ack
Spot on Ack-Ack.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 23, 2016, 11:06:04 PM
and Vudak, Puma44 suffers from the old age weakness of trying to explain things simply, step by step. Its how we learned, and as we age, its how we try to teach.
Pity us. Woe woe woe.
- oldman
Who are you calling old Oldman? :rofl. I'm holding strong at 22. :D
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Randy1 on February 24, 2016, 06:53:25 AM
Regarding your example of a plane flying straight having zero lift, is incorrect, if it had zero lift, it would there for be flying at zero G, and would gradually go into a nose dive
Planes flying straight and level, are normally flying under a force (think Lift Vector here) of around 1 +G nearly constant...
Correct me if I'm wrong please
TC
Almost right. Graphically speaking, the summation of the force down(gravity) and the force up(keep the plane level) equals zero. So a plane flying level has zero force(lift vector) to make it go up.
Another way to think of a vector example is on a plane going straight up. Now there are two vectors. The Gravity vector pulling the plane down(Constant) and the summation of the trust from the prop and the planes E(In MA terms). As E falls with speed loss and thrust vector(constant) the plane slows. At the precise point the planes stops going up, the summation of all vectors is zero.
The vomit comet is another good example where the summation of all vectors is zero to produce a weightless environment.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: DmonSlyr on February 24, 2016, 06:56:05 AM
and Vudak, Puma44 suffers from the old age weakness of trying to explain things simply, step by step. Its how we learned, and as we age, its how we try to teach.
Pity us. Woe woe woe.
- oldman
To be honest, I haven't seen any step by step training undertstanding from Puma. That is mostly why I've been making my arguements here. I just don't see enough depth from the trainers. Plus, if you expect a trainee 17 year old to know terminology before even being tought something about the game I think you are in the wrong forums. Maybe it would be best to post a sticky of BFM definitions with guidance so people understand what you are talking about.
Anyway, I will admit that I was the Pony B in this film. Junky and I thought it would be a good idea to show an advanced fight in the game to encourage players to see how real fights in the MA go down. Even close fights like this show there are things to still work on. I was showing defensive maneuvers. Junky was trailing my 6 and I attempted to make a fight out of it in order to pull a counterpunch. It's what I like to do in the game. I was going about 100 mph slower on the initial merge. The Pony B was just quite not able to get around as well as I wanted to, but I'm glad we could make a good fight out of it. That's mostly why I'm commenting here, because I know exactly what happened.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 24, 2016, 07:50:23 AM
Almost right. Graphically speaking, the summation of the force down(gravity) and the force up(keep the plane level) equals zero. So a plane flying level has zero force(lift vector) to make it go up.
Another way to think of a vector example is on a plane going straight up. Now there are two vectors. The Gravity vector pulling the plane down(Constant) and the summation of the trust from the prop and the planes E(In MA terms). As E falls with speed loss and thrust vector(constant) the plane slows. At the precise point the planes stops going up, the summation of all vectors is zero.
The vomit comet is another good example where the summation of all vectors is zero to produce a weightless environment.
I thought we were talking about "Lift Vector"?
let's go back to what has been posted:
I originally posted a link to the AH Training Corps article on "Flight Controls"
Vector is not an aviation invention. Vector is a mathematical display of forces. A vector has both direction and length where the length is an indication of magnitude.
As an example, a plane is going straight and level has zero lift vector. That is. the plane has no force to make it go up. Pull back hard on the stick and the length of the lift vector goes up at the same time the force to make the plane go straight shrinks.
Remember hot wheel cars that went through a loop. The vector on the car as it goes through the loop goes down representing centrifugal force. Go too slow and the little car falls off the track at the top of the loop.
Regarding your example of a plane flying straight having zero lift, is incorrect, if it had zero lift, it would there for be flying at zero G, and would gradually go into a nose dive
Planes flying straight and level, are normally flying under a force (think Lift Vector here) of around 1 +G nearly constant...
Actually it's mostly because lift adds drag. The lift vector is not really perpendicular to flight path although it's convenient to think of it that way. It's tilted back a little which is why more lift equals more drag. So, gravity aside, when turn performance is reduced after increasing pitch it's because drag has reduced your speed since, as Dolby mentioned, lift is both speed and AOA.
In level flight isn't the lift vector 1g? So the magnitude is expressed in radial g and the direction is near perpendicular to the flight path?
What we usually mean when we discuss lift vector is plane of maneuver. Flight path and lift vector direction being the 2 lines that define the plane.
I posted, in my first post, "basically, the same thing Dolby posted..."
then I replied to your post
then FLS came in and backed me up on the flying level and straight, ( in Aces High, I should have added since this is what we are referring to I gather) , FLS posted "In level flight isn't the lift vector 1g?"
now you have dropped the "Lift" part of "Lift Vector" and are simply referring to "Vector" and have changed the direction from Horizontal straight and level flight , to Vertical up and down flight
I am not here to argue, but why are you changing your first response to something completely different?
here is another AH Training Corps webpage link for you:
guess I should have included this one yesterday as well
I'll leave it at that...
hope this helps/ have a blessed day!
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 24, 2016, 08:08:28 AM
Since everyone seems to know all this stuff ( in their own minds, in my opinion )
does any of you know at what point a prop driven plane is producing the most power/ thrust, with the throttle and RPM's maxed? ( just a slight hi-jacking side question )
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 24, 2016, 10:31:53 AM
Randy do you think an airplane sitting on the ground has the same lift vector as an airplane in level flight?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Rolex on February 24, 2016, 03:05:32 PM
Is it stting on a treadmill? :noid
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 24, 2016, 03:17:11 PM
Randy do you think an airplane sitting on the ground has the same lift vector as an airplane in level flight?
The lift vector is negative equal to the mass of the plane sitting on the ground not moving. If the lift vector is positive the object goes up.
A plane in a dive will have a negative lift vector as well.
Keep in mind vectors represent the forces acting on an object. Adding a name like "Lift" to a vector gave it a false definition of always being positive of always being positive.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on February 24, 2016, 05:09:40 PM
The lift vector is negative equal to the mass of the plane sitting on the ground not moving. If the lift vector is positive the object goes up.
A plane in a dive will have a negative lift vector as well.
Keep in mind vectors represent the forces acting on an object. Adding a name like "Lift" to a vector gave it a false definition of always being positive of always being positive.
A plane can be in an "unloaded" zero G dive, the same way it could be in an unloaded zero g climb....or sometimes referred to as a zoom climb....either way the lift vector would still be the same
Hate to answer FLS's question that he asked you, but since you didn't....the lift vector would be almost identical whether the plane was in level flight or sitting on the runway....as has been mentioned numerous times already before...the lift vector runs straight line up through the canopy, regardless what ever direction the plane is pointing....you roll,climb,dive etc to point your lift vector the direction you are wanting to fly....
Hope this helps
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Kingpin on February 24, 2016, 05:42:53 PM
As an example, a plane is going straight and level has zero lift vector. That is. the plane has no force to make it go up.
Strictly speaking, an aircraft does still has a positive lift vector when it is flying level. The lift force vector is simply negating the effect of the gravity/weight vector. Just because the net effect of those two vectors is zero (level flight), it doesn't change the value of the vectors themselves. Otherwise, to say there is zero lift in level flight would also be to say there is no gravity, which is not true.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Kingpin on February 24, 2016, 05:57:16 PM
So why is understanding and visualizing your lift vector important?Because you roll your lift vector to where you want to go when you turn. To turn under the nose of your enemy (to avoid a shot or force an overshoot) you roll your lift vector under the enemy and pull to make your turn. When you think of turning in terms of lift vector placement, it simplifies maneuvers and makes them applicable in a variety of geometries.
I believe something was mentioned in this discussion that to avoid a shot or force an overshoot you "make a nose low turn". However, this statement is not entirely accurate. You can pass under the nose of your enemy (avoiding a shot and/or forcing an overshoot) while making a nose-high turn, provided your lift vector is still under your opponent. The geometry of the fight matters. For example, in a vertical scissors where you are both climbing (nose up), you can can still roll your lift vector under your opponent to turn under their nose and still be in a nose-up attitude. In fact, this can be advantageous -- by being nose-up you are decelerating. If your opponent pushes his nose down to force the crossing shot, the speed differential may force an overshoot and a possible reversal.
Correct lift vector placement is a simple but widely applicable concept. Most turn-fights are largely about lift vector placement and E-management. If you understand and think in those two terms, everything can become easier. That is why trainers tend to talk in simplified terms, like lift vector, instead of focusing on a set "maneuvers" (i.e. nose low turn) -- this is not to be "technical", but quite the opposite: to simplify things.
When I was less experienced, I used to think of most fights as being about maintaining speed and using the right maneuvers. Now I tend to think of many fights as maintaining the right lift vector placement and using the right speed.
<S> Kingpin
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: LCADolby on February 24, 2016, 05:57:35 PM
See, look at what you have done Puma, this is all your fault! :old:
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: morfiend on February 24, 2016, 06:04:49 PM
See, look at what you have done Puma, this is all your fault! :old:
Ya shame on him for starting a discussion and having a couple of flight terms defined!
I'm almost positive Puma has forgotten more about flying than I'll ever know,thats why I tend to stick to basics,teach BFM and if I think the player is ready work on merges!
:salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Vudak on February 24, 2016, 06:06:27 PM
Yeah, and it couldn't possibly have been done in any other way, whatsoever.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: morfiend on February 24, 2016, 06:42:20 PM
Yeah, and it couldn't possibly have been done in any other way, whatsoever.
I'm not quite sure where you are going with this or what you think could have been done differently. All I read was a couple of questions asked looking for an explanation.
That said I suppose you are correct,it could have been done differently,I'm just not sure how exactly?
:salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: The Fugitive on February 24, 2016, 09:19:44 PM
Yeah, and it couldn't possibly have been done in any other way, whatsoever.
Sure he could have called out the player for not knowing what he is talking about, but instead he asked a few question to verify whether the player knew what he was talking about.
Discussions like these can easily be filled with miss-information due to players "thinking" they know what they are talking about and spewing incorrect information.
I for one am happy to see terms defined so EVERYONE is on the same page, we all learn, and like the OP said, we all have more fun fights.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JOACH1M on February 24, 2016, 10:49:17 PM
Omg, this is a game people.
:rofl
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: JunkyII on February 24, 2016, 11:54:31 PM
Kingpin, You say you want to angle your lift vector underneath your opponent? In the vertical scissors I was trying to put my lift vector toward the side the other plane was rolling. In rolling scissors I try to put my lift vector behind my opponent. This was how I was "trained" (More like getting beat up in the DA and getting told what I should be doing)....
Is this wrong?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Randy1 on February 25, 2016, 05:34:39 AM
I was trying to explain the source of the term "Lift Vector". That is what confused y'all.
I understand the term "vector" and how it is used in mathematics, well more so how it is used or applied in architecture/using AutoCAD (edit: I need to add that I am not an Architect, I used to calculate and design HVAC-R systems using AutoCAD and using ...no need for a long diatribe)
I also understand the term "Lift vector" and how it is used in relation to flight dynamics
You, in my observation of your posts and explanations, you are getting the 2 terms confused/or mixing them together, when they shouldn't be...
The term "vector" can be applied/used in a number of different things.....ie: what's your vector, Victor?
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Drano on February 25, 2016, 07:32:08 AM
In rolling scissors I try to put my lift vector behind my opponent.
That is correct and should be the goal. If you see your opponent's lift vector working toward your tail, it's time to aggressively work yours behind his tail. If you are successful getting your lift vector behind him, be prepared for a snap shot in the event he doesn't use the vertical to get out of your plane of motion because he is most likely going to over shoot across your nose at close range. :salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Kingpin on February 25, 2016, 02:21:17 PM
Kingpin, You say you want to angle your lift vector underneath your opponent? In rolling scissors I try to put my lift vector behind my opponent. This was how I was "trained" (More like getting beat up in the DA and getting told what I should be doing)....
Is this wrong?
No, you have it right. The part you missed was that I was talking about one specific case where you "put your lift vector under your opponent when you are trying to turn under your opponent". (i.e. in a defensive break turn or to help foil a crossing shot). My general point was that you don't need to be "nose down" to turn under someone's nose, your lift vector just needs to be under them.
You are correct that in a rolling scissors you place your lift vector behind your opponent, because you are trying to remain behind his 3/9 line. This is another extremely important example of correct lift vector placement, so I'm glad you mentioned it.
In the vertical scissors I was trying to put my lift vector toward the side the other plane was rolling
I'm not 100% sure what you mean by the part I highlighted. I think I get what you're saying, but I want to be sure. Is there a time in the film you can point to as an example of this?
<S>
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: DmonSlyr on February 25, 2016, 07:07:24 PM
Just curious here. Is there not a word for a plane that can utilize the lift vector better than other planes? For example if Junky was flying a Nik during that fight, he would have been able to create a much steeper lift vector in a more agile way. Some planes are capable of pulling up much more quickly and getting behind the oppoenet on the roll around. Some planes are better in a slow speed rolling scissors. So I'm wondering what is the word for that?
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on February 25, 2016, 07:18:52 PM
Just curious here. Is there not a word for a plane that can utilize the lift vector better than other planes? For example if Junky was flying a Nik during that fight, he would have been able to create a much steeper lift vector in a more agile way. Some planes are capable of pulling up much more quickly and getting behind the oppoenet on the roll around. Some planes are better in a slow speed rolling scissors. So I'm wondering what is the word for that?
No, no specific word. It comes down to the individual pilot and his ability to take advantage of the strengths of his ride and the weaknesses of the opponent. Out in the fighter world there is a saying that "hamburger is still hamburger, no matter what you wrap it in". Skill and proficiency are basic to the win.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 25, 2016, 08:02:16 PM
Just curious here. Is there not a word for a plane that can utilize the lift vector better than other planes? For example if Junky was flying a Nik during that fight, he would have been able to create a much steeper lift vector in a more agile way. Some planes are capable of pulling up much more quickly and getting behind the oppoenet on the roll around. Some planes are better in a slow speed rolling scissors. So I'm wondering what is the word for that?
The better turning plane has a lower stall speed. Since it can produce a given g load at a lower speed it will turn faster.
Just curious here. Is there not a word for a plane that can utilize the lift vector better than other planes? For example if Junky was flying a Nik during that fight, he would have been able to create a much steeper lift vector in a more agile way. Some planes are capable of pulling up much more quickly and getting behind the oppoenet on the roll around. Some planes are better in a slow speed rolling scissors. So I'm wondering what is the word for that?
I would say roll rate! If you have a plane with a high roll rate,like say a 190 you can effectively roll the A/C to aim the lift vector at the enemy.
Under positive G's an A/C turns into the lift vector,the soon you can orientate the lift vector at the enemy the soon you can turn into him.
In a roll scissor fight I am constantly "looking up" and rolling my Aircraft to keep that view on the enemy.
So an aircraft with a good roll rate can use the lift vector easier than a better turning plane that cant roll so well.
YMMV!
:salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: FLS on February 26, 2016, 01:52:53 PM
Morfiend I suspect Violatr was talking about vertical turns in the rolling scissors when he used the term steeper lift vector.
You are correct that lift vector is set with roll. :aok
So we have 3 different interpretations of his question highlighting the importance of proper terminology for communication. :D
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: morfiend on February 26, 2016, 03:18:51 PM
Agreed! :aok
I should have edited the quote,as I was only trying to answer the first sentence!
:salute
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on March 07, 2016, 03:31:41 PM
Violator, the word you are looking for is "Arch", you want to be able to pull a higher(read as--> tighter) arch in your rolling scissors while maintaining your speed and not slowing down, thus pushing your opponent out in front of you for the simple reason they don't recognize what you are doing and are staying in the same roll pattern, being a little more elongated....
I really don't see the "3 different interpretations", only a difference in how it is being said... we all word things different than others, although the same message gets through, from what I have read in the posts......but that's just my opinion
All the Trainers try to stay focused and teach proper bfm, with the only difference is how each individual Trainer words it for their student...
hope this helps
TC ( btw, no one decided or tried to answer my side question, the answer is right at or before Stall, A prop driven plane is producing maximum thrust with WOT )
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on March 07, 2016, 05:58:09 PM
Thank Save for posting the article in Aircraft and vehicles forum:
Quote
Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: BuckShot on March 09, 2016, 08:59:36 PM
What's your vector Victor?
Over under Dunn, over.
And don't call me Shirley.
Sorry, had to
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Gman on March 09, 2016, 10:04:15 PM
Hey Puma, I wanted to ask you this before, and this thread reminded me - you had mentioned that in the F106 when you didn't have the Genie crowdpleaser missiles loaded, you usually had Aim4s, and that both missiles were very poor options (obviously with the nuclear warhead, haha) for visual range/close fights, and that the gun with the 600 rounds was very important because of this.
That being the case, I wondered if you practiced a lot of BFM/ACM and close range gun fights since the gun was the only reliable/sound option for the F106 if you had an enemy target in close. If so, what was that like, can you tell me/us a bit about the F106 performance and capability in that arena.
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on March 10, 2016, 01:08:36 AM
Good memory Gman! :aok. Since the gun package mounted where Genie was carried, the most likely fight was going to be fighter vs fighter, instead of "Six" vs Russian bombers coming over the North Pole, i.e. shoot 'em in the face with the nuke.
The Six was designed as a single role air defense interceptor. As such, it was very fast and could accelerate in a heart beat, and do it all at high altitude because of the big delta wing. When loitering around at 300 knots or so and the need to go fast arouse, a slight unload and crack of the afterburner, it would quickly accelerate to the 400 to 500 knots range depending how much smash was desired. On a DACT mission once, my afterburner refused to light off once we got into the fighting airspace. There was no way I was going to pass up the opportunity to fight the evil F-15 horde that was waiting for us. So, I stuck with my ops officer, continued to maneuver as a tactical two ship, and quickly learned I could accelerate to supersonic speed by unloading to less than one G and going to mil power. I quit trying to light the burner because in normal ops it would produce a small "burner puff" which would give away the best intended hiding attempt. All that being said, when it was time to step into the phone booth for a knife fight, the Six would produce one great "bat turn". And then it was time to unload, point nose down, and go full grunt with the burner and regain energy. The six required a lot of ingenuity and surprise against the newer F-teen jets. The bat turn pretty much had to be perfect to set up for a quick snap shot against a better turn sustaining fighter. We were very happy to have the gun. It opened up a lot of options short of radiating everything in sight with the Genie. But what an attention getter that would have been. I was fortunate to have live fired three Genies (without the nuke warhead, of course). That's a whole other fun story for another time. The "Six" or "Iron Triangle" was a distinct pleasure to fly and always turned heads when it showed up on initial at 400 knots, or maybe just a little more. It was truly the Lamborghini of its time.
Apologies for going of in the bar ditch with the thread. Just wanted to answer Gman's question. We now rejoin our regularly scheduled thread. Check six! :salute
My jet during an air defense alert tour at Davis Monthan AFB, Az.
Oh by the way, Gman, when we flew cross country from Minot, ND to Tucson, it was a full AB climb to 39,000 feet, roll out on course abeam the departure end of the runway, cruise at 540 knots TAS until the external tanks burned out, and then up to 45,000 feet or higher for the remainder of the trip. :D
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Oldman731 on March 10, 2016, 07:08:47 AM
I quit trying to light the burner because in normal ops it would produce a small "burner puff" which would give away the best intended hiding attempt.
You guys turned icons off for those fights? Didn't anyone complain?
Great write-up, Puma, thanks. Who won the fight with the F-15s?
- oldman
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Kanth on March 10, 2016, 08:18:53 AM
Yep, great writeup :aok
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: TequilaChaser on March 10, 2016, 09:17:49 AM
Thanks for sharing your USAF memories with us Puma, <S>
regarding your mention of doing a "bat turn" in your F-106.......could that also be described as a instantaneous turn described like ----> "Most interceptors will be doing a high to low conversion which gives extra energy for the intercept.".... just curious..... we have had players talk about the term "bat turn" in this Help and Training Forum before, and iirc, there were some good discussions regarding it...
I'm guessing this was somewhere around late 70's/early 80's, regarding your "tour at Davis Monthan AFB, Az."......or am I way off
Thank You for sharing / Thank You for your Service! :salute
TC
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on March 10, 2016, 11:42:45 AM
You guys turned icons off for those fights? Didn't anyone complain?
Great write-up, Puma, thanks. Who won the fight with the F-15s?
- oldman
Yeah, Oldman, we always had our icons turned :D off, especially against F-15s. Going against Eagles was an obvious challenge if the prebriefed ROE was "guns and heaters". If ROE was "all up", we would shoot them in the face with a couple of Genies and game over. We basically had to out sneak them the best we could, use our bat turn for a snap shot with the gun or lob a couple AIM-4s in their direction. We called the AIM-4s "Hittiles" vs the common missiles description. The AIM-4 fuze was on the fins about four feet from the nose. The idea was to hit a Russian bomber, penetrate into the fuselage, make contact with one of the four fuzes, and go boom inside. So, getting a a high PK (Percentage Kill) against a fighter was pretty sketchy. That was the reason AIM-4s were fired in pairs, the low PK.
At a Red Flag, we always played on the Red Air side with the USAF Agressors. Since the Eagles frequently handed us our lunch after our first bat turn, my wingman and I decided to get creative. We launched well ahead of the Blue Air strike force and hid at very low level using a ridge of mountains west of student gap to hide. Right on cue, the Eagles showed up at medium altitude in two four ship Joe Bob Boxes. The four ships were in trail of each other, NOT BELLY CHECKING, as they marched into the area. When we confirmed they were the only Eagles in the package, we stroked the burners and climbed from deep six of the trailing four ship with our radars in standby and IR domes up. We Fox Twoed the two trailers, ducked under them, got the lead two, ducked under them and were getting shots on the trailers of the leading four ship before they realized there were foxes in the hen house. You can imagine how aggressive they got with us from then on. So, as the old fighter saying goes "Hamburger is hamburger, no matter what you wrap it in".
Title: Re: P38J vs P51B MA 1v1 Flight Review
Post by: Puma44 on March 10, 2016, 11:56:04 AM
Thanks for sharing your USAF memories with us Puma, <S>
regarding your mention of doing a "bat turn" in your F-106.......could that also be described as a instantaneous turn described like ----> "Most interceptors will be doing a high to low conversion which gives extra energy for the intercept.".... just curious..... we have had players talk about the term "bat turn" in this Help and Training Forum before, and iirc, there were some good discus'sions regarding it...
I'm guessing this was somewhere around late 70's/early 80's, regarding your "tour at Davis Monthan AFB, AZ."......or am I way off
Thank You for sharing / Thank You for your Service! :salute
TC
Yes, TC, it was our best instantaneous turn. Because of the huge delta wing, we would burn off a lot of energy which then forced a nose low, full AB, extension to regain energy for another bat turn. We couldn't maintain the turn rate that the Eagles were capable of. If we were doing pure intercept tactics against bombers we used head on, shoot em in the face Genie attacks or did stern conversions if a VID was required. If the VID produced a hostile, the AIM-4s were typically used, or the gun when it came on board.
Hey Puma, I wanted to ask you this before, and this thread reminded me - you had mentioned that in the F106 when you didn't have the Genie crowdpleaser missiles loaded, you usually had Aim4s, and that both missiles were very poor options (obviously with the nuclear warhead, haha) for visual range/close fights, and that the gun with the 600 rounds was very important because of this.
That being the case, I wondered if you practiced a lot of BFM/ACM and close range gun fights since the gun was the only reliable/sound option for the F106 if you had an enemy target in close. If so, what was that like, can you tell me/us a bit about the F106 performance and capability in that arena.
I may have gotten a bit of track answering you question previously. For many years, the Six community didn't have much formal BFM training. After all, it was an Air Defense Interceptor. During my tour, BFM training was coming into play. I absolutely loved the stuff and eventually became one of our squadron BFM instructors. So, yes we did practice it a lot when it became a formal training program. :salute