Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: ZE on October 30, 2024, 05:04:51 PM
-
Guys
Today, after I killed a player in MA, he commented on 200 channel that it is hard to believe the Brew can win a fight against the 109 he was flying, suggesting that HT should review this plane's performance in the game.
I also received a similar comment from another player suggesting the Brew in this game is not properly set.
Since this is the only plane I fly, I got my attention to those comments. The attached file, I believe shows that in this fight he lost speed and altitude when chasing a bomber and I was able to jumped behind him with more speed and hit him. I don't see why those comments again about the Brew - being the slow fighter in the game - and wonder if the HT Brew model is similar to the Finns Brewster B-239E and has the correct aeronautic behavior?
PD: How to attach a Film.ahf file ?
https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,404990.45.html
-
You are fine ZE. He is just whining. You got that brew really well when it comes to maintaining E.
-
I love when ayers say things like a plane not properly set. Because they n er flew it to know either way.
First time you killed me in a Brew it was a lil shocking, but then “this guy has some nads to even fight with it” second time I realized he’s one with that AC., Best brew pilot I’ve seen.
Whats funny is it catches most off guard and think its gonna be a effortless kill, then POW NiteNite
-
You destroy my 109 all the time ZE
Your fights are always good ones sir
:cheers:
Eagler
-
I'm more worried about Brewsters durability in it's Finnish reincarnation, where they removed essential protection.
-
My main ride when I play
-
Since this is the only plane I fly, I got my attention to those comments.
Hi ZE
Questions of aircraft performance often peak my interest. In most cases the AH Film is not forthcoming resulting in much unnecessary speculation. However, in this case you have posted a film that includes the action and the resulting comments. Thank you for posting, I enjoyed watching the film.
I don't see why those comments again about the Brew - being the slow fighter in the game - and wonder if the HT Brew model is similar to the Finns Brewster B-239E and has the correct aeronautic behavior?
In this case I don't think we need to look at the aircraft performance, the answers are not to be found in the aerodynamics, they can be found in the geometry of the fight and the behaviour of the pilots.
Firstly, the 109 pilot in this engagement was partially correct. At one point close to the initial merge, as he passed you, he was 2k higher and 130mph faster. It is easy to see how from his perspective he considered that you weren't really a threat. However, you executed a lead turn and he reacted by turning back into you for a second merge, where he took and missed a high aspect shot. After that he immediately disengaged to chase a low A20G.
However, as he did so he made a number of BFM errors and conceded his initial advantage. He became target fixated. In his mind, you had been dismissed as irrelevant as he focused entirely on the A20. In reality you were on his long six. At this point he was still faster, and and despite the fact he was already in trouble, he could have extended as he claimed should have been possible.
It was then that the A20G executed a break turn and reversed back towards you. The 109 pilot was lost in the moment so when the A20G pulled into the vertical he followed him up and came out on a different heading, where you had already closed the distance and were able to get into guns range by cutting the corner to saddle up.
He was right, he did have a much faster aircraft, he could have respected the threat and extended.
Instead he chose to manoeuvre himself onto your 12 O'Clock, at close range and then continued to ignore you while you sat on his tail knocking off parts of his aircraft. When he realised what was happening, it was too late.
As often happens after a short period of target fixation, his aircraft disintegrated, leaving him surprised and confused. That explains the complaints on 200.
I saw nothing that spoke to aircraft performance or aerodynamics. It was all about the geometry of the fight, target fixation and pilot disorientation.
For your part, you appeared to be very familiar with the Brewster's flying qualities and fully exploited them while executing superior BFM against a superior fighter.
Nicely done sir.
Hope that helps.
Badboy
-
Thanks for the answers and analysis of the film. This is precisely why I still believe
- even with some issues -, this is the best game. I understand the frustration when someone is killed, but don't like it when HT receives unnecessary comments.
I'm not the best player -or pretend to be -, and BREW is not a good plane, but in the game, in my humble opinion, it is fun.
-
Thanks for the answers and analysis of the film. This is precisely why I still believe
- even with some issues -, this is the best game. I understand the frustration when someone is killed, but don't like it when HT receives unnecessary comments.
I'm not the best player -or pretend to be -, and BREW is not a good plane, but in the game, in my humble opinion, it is fun.
ZE, you’ve got the Brewster mastered, know BFM, and employ it consistently with success. That’s why the Brewster surprises the occasion player who doesn’t have a grip on BFM and energy management. Hence, the whine about it being modeled incorrectly.
-
I always give a Brewster some respect been surprised by one more than once.
-
ACM's already been covered well. ZE, on the forum and in game you always seem like a class act, sincere and a good stick. If there's one thing I've learned through the whole YKW experience is that it's not to interact with people that way online. Some people are simply nuts, or at least temporarily nuts especially when they don't get their own way. Some players are paying for $15's-worth of ego-stroke per month. Just tune them out when they're like that and go about your business. The other fellow could have also considered that he's ignorant of relative energy-states instead of blaming HTC's modelling of the Brewster.
Bice shootin' btw.
-
I used to have films of brewsters passing HO turn 180 degrees level and seeing the data in the film showing nearly zero loss in speed.
-
I used to have films of brewsters passing HO turn 180 degrees level and seeing the data in the film showing nearly zero loss in speed.
I'd like to see them.
-
I have passed a brew going in the opposite direction, both of us in a slight climb, in my 38J. Me flying straight and the brew turns 180 and then imediately stays with me in the climb. Seems odd but that has happened a few times.
-
I used to have films of brewsters passing HO turn 180 degrees level and seeing the data in the film showing nearly zero loss in speed.
Thanks for the answers guys,
ICE, I will test this today since, in my knowledge of CFM, the only way I can turn 180 degrees and don't lose my speed is to rudder down during the turn, scary especially at low altitud.
I will try to attach my test film...
-
I have passed a brew going in the opposite direction, both of us in a slight climb, in my 38J. Me flying straight and the brew turns 180 and then imediately stays with me in the climb. Seems odd but that has happened a few times.
I did with other planes, but until certain moment... maintain the climb more based on lift than speed. In my lower experience, I can turn, climb, but losing my speed and distance from the enemy plane...
-
You turn with Brewster, you die. If Brewster comes in at a bazillion feet above your plane, you die. Best thing to do is BNZ that Brew until it's dead. :aok
-
No access to film atm… was it me?? :x 🤣
You’ve killed me so many times it might have been, but not recently… that I recall 🤔
Concur with the general sentiment here, if u engage a Brew you’d better squash it fast, a pilot like u will get the angles eventually and/or accurate enough to get 1k hits. Ur dead if fight goes past 3 merges in a LW plane, unless you’re just a BnZ clown, CoE/alt merges = ☠️ vs Brew.
-
You and Scott are impossible in them. My desk and wall next to can attest to that… As bad or worse than Moth on the deck in N1k.
:mad:
:salute
-
Brew has always seemed a little sus to me. I think it accelerates too fast and holds E too well. The Finish Brew has a worse power to weight ratio than the FM-2 yet can it fly circles around the navy bird.
It’s only real weakness is flat out speed. Climbs poorly too but only if it starts slow. If it’s got a good head of steam it’ll hang on the prop quite some time.
Last two fighters added in the game are the Brew and the Yak-3 if memory serves. Think HT forgot to carry the one when he did math on the drag model for those two aircraft. Both seem to hold onto speed and accelerate faster than they should.
-
Brew has always seemed a little sus to me. I think it accelerates too fast and holds E too well. The Finish Brew has a worse power to weight ratio than the FM-2 yet can it fly circles around the navy bird.
It’s only real weakness is flat out speed. Climbs poorly too but only if it starts slow. If it’s got a good head of steam it’ll hang on the prop quite some time.
Last two fighters added in the game are the Brew and the Yak-3 if memory serves. Think HT forgot to carry the one when he did math on the drag model for those two aircraft. Both seem to hold onto speed and accelerate faster than they should.
Yak-7B was added the same time as the Yak-3. Also. we got the A6M3 before the new Yaks. Neither of those are accused of holding their E exceptionally well.
-
Yak-7B was added the same time as the Yak-3. Also. we got the A6M3 before the new Yaks. Neither of those are accused of holding their E exceptionally well.
A6M3 has other fine qualities. Must try that again, it's been years.
- oldman
-
I understand planes in the game can't have all the exact specirfication and attributes of the real planes, but we all know what to expect from them and take advantage of minor differences.
In reality is a great game...
-
I always thought it seemed a bit overmodeled, BUT I have no data to back that up and it's not like I can't choose to fly it.
-
I used to have films of brewsters passing HO turn 180 degrees level and seeing the data in the film showing nearly zero loss in speed.
Of course every aircraft can turn with zero loss in airspeed, by reducing the load factor during the turn.
The Brewster's performance in AH compared to two other aircraft can be seen in the Doghouse plot below. Along with sea level values for Corner velocity, climb rate and top speed, those values along with the Ps=0 curves shows that it compares very closely with these other fighters, yet they don't receive the same negative attention.
(https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=410044.0;attach=37790)
The Ps=0 zero curves show that the while the Brewster sustains energy in a turn better than the I16 it is significantly worse at sustained turning than the A6M2. In a sustained turn, the A6M2 can sustain almost four degrees per second more than the Brewster for what would be considered a decisive advantage.
One thing I think helps the Brewster a lot, is that while the Zeke, and many other aircraft lose control authority at high speed, the Brewster appears to retain full control authority at speed well above its top speed which means it is easy to maneuver when diving from altitude and also at very low speeds, so it can be more deadly in dives and zooms than aircraft that lose some control authority in those situations. That of course explains why the experienced Brewster drivers fly it that way.
However I think it can be seen that the Brewster doesn't stand out in this comparison in terms of its sustained turning ability.
During my flight tests of this aircraft back in 2009, nothing else seemed to stand out as noteworthy. In the years since then, when ever I've been surprised at the speed or energy retention of the Brewster, it has always been as a result of some hidden/retained energy after a dive and that's just a testimony to the fact that it is being flown to its strengths.
The simple fact is that to do well in any aircraft, you need to know it well and fly it to its strengths, in that regard the Brewster is no different to any other aircraft in the game.
Hope that helps
Badboy
-
Yak-7B was added the same time as the Yak-3. Also. we got the A6M3 before the new Yaks. Neither of those are accused of holding their E exceptionally well.
Actually..........
(https://live.staticflickr.com/5028/5888520241_2cc03a88cd_b.jpg)
-
Hope that helps
Badboy
Thanks for those facts, Bad, as always very detailed analysis. :salute
The only thing missing here, is what I said : fly the plane you like and you enjoy it the most and have fun... Try your best to survive all encounters, but don't worry if you die, since this is a game and we're here to have fun...
ZE
-
I think a lot of people certainly underestimate the E a Brewster carries. Its a very good turning plane and a good pilot in it is very scary, like ZE. If he jumps on your 6 with more speed than you, it's just about GG.
You have to be a little more patient fighting Brewsters, cannot just try to turn n burn with them, you have to extend out a little further before doing a emmilman. Once their speed dies down a bit, then you can gain the E advantage, but they are very good defensive planes so you have to be very careful in the overshoot along with not getting picked by other planes. I always make sure not to get too slow around Brewsters.
-
Actually..........
There was an altitude-related bug with the A6M3 when initially released. It was Debrody who evidenced it and it was fixed.
-
I sent the film in but I remember him complaining after I only flew one mission in it to hunt 163s.
I found this one as well as other high altitude bugs.
Take a AR234 and watch your fuel burn above 32,000 feet. The fuel burn and thrust will power you to overspeed at some altitudes and other altitudes allow you to back off the throttle and maximize range.
But…. Climb another 500 feet and full throttle barely keeps you in flight.
Climb another 1000 feet and it streaks across the sky.
Harness it properly and you, to, can troll 163s.
-
When I started flying Aces High, I was surprised by the Brewster. I had read about the battle of Midway, and I thought the Brewster would be an easy kill. I was very surprised to find out how good the plane was in game, and I also thought HT got it wrong. Then I found this note in the plane database:
"The Brewster arguably gets the most number of complaints about being inaccurately modeled in Aces High. It is not, however, the overburdened, underpowered model that met disaster at the Battle of Midway, but rather the lightened model that the Finns used to great effect against the Soviet Union."
https://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/Brewster_B-239
That answered the question about the flight characteristics of the Brewster. It also explains why people keep thinking it is wrong.
-
"The Brewster arguably gets the most number of complaints about being inaccurately modeled in Aces High. It is not, however, the overburdened, underpowered model that met disaster at the Battle of Midway, but rather the lightened model that the Finns used to great effect against the Soviet Union."
And with a better engine, de-Navalised, no self-sealing fuel tanks and cockpit armor either. Should burn like a Zero and arguably only Finnish paint schemes ought to have been allowed, no?
-
And with a better engine, de-Navalised, no self-sealing fuel tanks and cockpit armor either. Should burn like a Zero...
Our B-239 will out climb an A6M2 by 100 ft/min; with a rate of 2,900 ft/min vs. 2,800 with the Zero.
For context, the Brewsters uses by the British Commonwealth in Singapore could only attain about 2,300 ft/min of climb rate.
and arguably only Finnish paint schemes ought to have been allowed, no?
Ideally, yes. And I maintain that our B-239 has no place in special events outside of Finland either.
-
only Finnish paint schemes ought to have been allowed, no?
Yes. Really, there's no comparison between the Midway and Singapore Buffalos and what the Finns got. Luche and others may correct me, but in my memory the Finns were pretty pushy about telling HTC that the Buffalo the Finns got was way superior to the ones that the Marines and Brits died in. Took a number of modifications, IIRC.
Bottom line, it's a historical plane, but unique, and should be advertised as such. I'm with Shida.
- oldman
-
Bottom line, it's a historical plane, but unique, and should be advertised as such. I'm with Shida.
So shines a sliver of agreement in a weary world :) :salute
-
Fly one for a TOUR and get back to me..
-
Fly one for a TOUR and get back to me..
:rofl I double dog dare them.
-
And with a better engine, de-Navalised, no self-sealing fuel tanks and cockpit armor either. Should burn like a Zero and arguably only Finnish paint schemes ought to have been allowed, no?
Prior to the diversion the USN striped out the self-sealing fuel tanks, pilot armour plating, landing hook and life raft from Finnish F2A-1 Buffalos, which made the aircraft much lighter and more maneuverable. It had approximately less than 10% more wing loading than a Zero.
They were given the export number Model B-239, were equipped with an export-approved Wright R-1820-G5 nine-cylinder radial engine of 950 hp (708 kW) and after their delivery to Finland, the Finnish Air Force added armored backrests, metric flight instruments, the Finnish Väisälä T.h.m.40 gunsight, and four .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns.
-
Fly one for a TOUR and get back to me..
Well, OK, I'll get started on that.
- oldman
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/6093/6280497885_aa08be15c4_b.jpg)
-
If the I153 showed up here, people would forget the brewster.
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/6093/6280497885_aa08be15c4_b.jpg)
What witchcraft is this? Where are the propellors?