Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on March 20, 2002, 03:53:19 AM
-
I've noticed this effect in planes like spits, n1k2 and Typhs, but always into a moving plane. Yesterday I was in the tower, watching the aproach of a very fast enemy F6F. Then a friendly N1K2 jumped to the runaway and took off just after a straffing pass of the F6F that went vertical. The N1k2 took off and went vertical clibmbing towards the zooming hellcat. At some point, clearly visible from the tower, the N1K2 stopped climbing, but kept nose up, freezed in the sky, pointing at the F6F and then started to fire like mad, still stopped in the air pointing vertically up. The F6F dodged the shoots and the N1K2 simply leveled and performed a 180 degree turn to repeat the vertical spraying zoom, this time the F6F was destroyed. Looking this scene from the tower, the N1K2 was just like a chopper instead a plane, hung by its prop for an ethernity while spraying like a possesed. Didn't have its enormous engine any effect when stopped in vertical?
-
That well designed test is proof that the N1K2 model is wrong. Good work!
Conclusive evidence like that shows why your input is valued by everyone.
-
I've seen it happen too. Niki climbing like an me163....
-
No JoeCrip, this is not a question of climb rate. The problem is not just the climbing speed, but the time this bird keeps hung, stopped in the air pointing up, it is like a hovering helicopter.
-
Well, you know what I mean :) After take off the niki goes verticle..and climbs as high as it can go...once it is at 20 MPH it just stays in air, and it wont go down for a few seconds, kinda like (as you said) a helicopter. IMO this should be the #1 thing on the priority list to fix
-
Be aware Joe, Zuma may be online and with factual data proving this is nothing to be fixed :D
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Be aware Joe, Zuma may be online and with factual data proving this is nothing to be fixed :D
Once again mandy has trouble with the "Burden of Proof" concept.
Anyhow, does anyone have film of this? It sounds like something to watch for, since I can't stand anything on its nose in here but the 38. Especially the part about maintaining altitude after what appeared to be a stall. Smells like lag to me, but with the new film editor, you could even get into the cockpit of the offending nik and see what he sees. Until then its just anecdotal evidence. Next to worthless. But then after reading Montys post, you already know that.
-Sikboy
-
I'm describing just what I saw from the tower, and no lag/warps at all were present. You dont need any film, you may go offline, pickup a n1k2j and put it in the vertical checking the airspeed and just looking it from a external view to get your own conclussions spending only 5 mins in the test.
-
So if Im unable to recreate the results from your anecdote in a "laboratory environment", does that then disprove your theory, or just prove that I can't fly the niki to save my ass?
-Sikboy
-
I have not a theory, what I have is a visual testimony (very different concepts).
So, your test is not going to disprove what I've seen, but, at least, you will prove that it could have been an anecdotal ocurrence and not the norm.
-
Your theory, implied by the last sentence of your testimony, is that the Engine torque should have had some effect on the Niki in a verticle climb, and that this effect is/was not present. By stating that " I've noticed this effect in planes like spits, n1k2 and Typhs" you imply that this "effect" is a repeating occurence, and spread out over several models. Or is this not what you meant to say? Or am I just being too literal with your post? Just wondering what I'm missing here.
-Sikboy
-
Blah, blah blah ...
Have you done the test or not????
-
Yes Yes, just ignore what you don't like. I can't do the test for another 8 hours or so, as I'm at work right now. I'm just trying to figure out what the test is designed to prove. I'll be elated if I can perform this manuever, but I have my doubts. Of course, If I do succeed, at least I'll have film of it, which will bring the whole thread out of the realm of conjecture and into the realm of evidence
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
I'm just trying to figure out what the test is designed to prove.
ROFLOL, you are the one with doubts about my experience, the test is mainly for you, to verify whether n1k2 is able to do that or not.
-
I haven't flown niki much, but long long time ago when I did, I took off from airfield with enemy niki inbound.
Got up and climbed a little, to end up below this enemy niki.
After couple of failed passes, he came in, I evaded, he went to loop, I waited a little, then pulled up and hung there like chopper, in the middle of his loop.
When he began going down from the loop, I flipped the nose over at correct time and got behind him.
...and within few seconds shot him down.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
That well designed test is proof that the N1K2 model is wrong. Good work!
Conclusive evidence like that shows why your input is valued by everyone.
LOL. A direct hit. :)
Lephturn
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
ROFLOL, you are the one with doubts about my experience, the test is mainly for you, to verify whether n1k2 is able to do that or not.
Try not to hurt yourself laughing Mandy.
Wow, this takes us right back to my second post on the topic. If I am unable to perform the manuever it could just as easily mean that I suck in the niki as it could mean that it's a chopper. I'm very interested in this, and I do aim to see if I can do it.
Yet somehow, I'm left to disprove allegations which have not had any proof offered. I'm certainly not saying that you didn't see what you claimed, just that it can't be taken very seriously without any sort of hard evidence. That's what I don't get. Every now and again, you provide evidence to back up your claims. Look at what you did with the 110/P-38 stats. A lot of work in there. A lot of data was gathered and presented. Great job. But in cases like this you just make a blanket statement, and then try to lay the burden of proof on others to disproove you. This is an "argument to ignorance" if you want the standard term. (Note, I'm NOT calling you ignorant). You're saying that something is true because you claim so, and it hasn't been proved false. But then, this is all probably blah blah blah anyway.
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I haven't flown niki much, but long long time ago when I did, I took off from airfield with enemy niki inbound.
Got up and climbed a little, to end up below this enemy niki.
After couple of failed passes, he came in, I evaded, he went to loop, I waited a little, then pulled up and hung there like chopper, in the middle of his loop.
When he began going down from the loop, I flipped the nose over at correct time and got behind him.
...and within few seconds shot him down.
'
Ahhh here we go, this is more like it. View from inside the cockpit at least. Once again anectdotal, but at least its experience vs. eyewitness. Thanks for the input Fishu.
-Sikboy
-
Sikboy, Fishu saw that from his cockpit, I saw the same from the tower at less than 2000 yards of distance (a perfect spectator place). Two different points of view of the same effect.
hehe Perhaps you are insterested into asking Fishu a film to prove what he said.
But it seems JoeCrip has same experiences ... ... more films to ask for? All anecdotal experiences?
Believe me, to hung a n1k2 by its prop doesn't require any special flying skill, go offline and enjoy the move by yourself. Uh, and you dont need to cut the throttle neither WEP.
But... ...why so many replies, in fact I have no interest at all into convincing you about anything... would my post be the opposite "N1K2 can't hung by its prop" and probably you would reply that this is anecdotal also, and that there is no evidence of that. If I show you a film of what I've seen you would answer also that this is anecdotal, that you need 2000 filmations more to take that as a fact.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
hehe Perhaps you are insterested into asking Fishu a film to prove what he said.
Believe me, to hung a n1k2 by its prop doesn't require any special flying skill, go offline and enjoy the move by yourself. Uh, and you dont need to cut the throttle neither WEP.
But... ...why so many replies, in fact I have no interest at all into convincing you about anything... would my post be the opposite "N1K2 can't hung by its prop" and probably you would reply that this is anecdotal also, and that there is no evidence of that. If I show you a film of what I've seen you would answer also that this is anecdotal, that you need 2000 filmations more to take that as a fact.
No, Film would not be anecdotal. Maybe you should look that word up. It would be evidence. Fishu's claim is somewhat different than yours and joecrips, because he claims to actually have done this to someone, yet even then, his account doesnt match yours. In your account a "very fast" hellcat is followed up by a niki that had started AFTER the pass with a 0 E state. In Fishu's tale, he had built up some E before following the other Niki up, and hung the prop only after his opponent had made a few passes and (presumably, to my mind) lessened his E-state advantage.
In fact, had your post been "the Niki can't hung by it's prop" I probably would have said "Hmm that's not surprising" and moved on. But you imply that this is a modeling problem without anything more than your story. Then, when asked to provide some evidence (as you have with other perceived injustices) you start into your argument to ignorance. When I try to pin-point exactly what your theory is, you give up on theorizing and post blah blah blah.
As to "so many replies" well, it takes two to argue and we both contribute.
-Sikboy
-
You simply didnt understand what I post, perhaps due my phetid english. The F6F arrived to our base very fast, and started to straffe it, then a n1k2 took off and tried to follow a vertical zoom of the hellcat, it failed to kill it in its first attempt, but kept hung in the vertical pointing at the F6F for a long time, firing but failing.
-
I think your absolutely right. The language barrier tends to exagerate these disagreements. I still do not believe that the imagine I have in my mind of what you discribed is at all possible. But it seems likely that what I'm seeing you describe, and what you are describing from your own point of view are two different things.
-Sikboy
[edit]PS: As I've said before, your english is way better than my spanish[/edit]
-
I've seen other aircraft do this also. I saw a friendly C-hog force a pursuing con to nearly overshoot and thus chose to climb away. The C-hog pilot (name withheld) pulls into a vertical, and shoots for 2-3 secs while hanging there (I'm sure it's not a real hover). Was watching this from a few k away trying to get there to clear the friendly's tail. I've seen a hurricane C do this to a fellow countryman in the CT. That same pilot almost got me earlier with the same move, but I saw him start his zoom so was able to get clear in time. Also F6F's. Maybe it has to do with taking only 25% fuel and not due to a particular plane's FM? None of the incidences I saw were right from take-off though. Mandoble, maybe you should start the film recorder everytime you fly just in case you see these things again. Just delete the film when you've had an uneventful night so you don't fill up your HD.
mauser
-
Hehe... I hung a 110G2 on its tail last night going after Ruaml. Ask him if you don't believe me. He started out a few thousand feet higher than me, but slower in airspeed. He went to divebomb something on a base of mine, and when he tried to zoom back up I followed him up. All you really need to have is a good light touch on the rudder and ailerons to keep your nose pointed in the right direction- After I got him I stalled real hard, when I looked at the speedometer I was doing about 40 mph (but I was already on the way down, so I probably was going a bit slower than that when I finally lost it).
-
i once got in a n1k, and decided to see it verticle performance, got it to about 20mph before it flipped over, but in about 5 secs i'd regained control
so.......how put the top secret alien hover drive engine into the n1k?
-
This is the very same thing i've been discussing with others in the P38 wingloading thread.
Try doing THAT in a 190 or 109 on full WEP. The plane will fight you and kick you around the moment you get below 100mph. A g10 wont even let you recover, it'l push you into a really, really nasty spin.
Yet N1k, spit, F4U and im sure many other planes (I personally have not tested this on any other rides besides the 3 I just mentioned) can hang on prop when fully gassed, full wep. And we're talking here about a lightweight plane with a MF huge 1990HP engine and about the one ride in the US arsenal famous for its strong torque issues.
Sikboy, here's what I get:
Full gas n1k, full ammo, take off, get it to 300mph, pull nose straight up, WEP it. Keep nose up and watch your speed... you will notice that its not until 55 mph that the plane will BARELY start to roll to a side or wiggle nose up and down, but its so slight you can compensate with extreme ease. Once the n1k gets to 20mph, it ALL BY ITSELF noses over in an instant, the moment the nose is pointing down you have complete and absolute control of the plane. No spin, no stall, no torque tumble. Do the same test again, this time FIRE your guns all the way up. You will lose speed faster, but the same thing will happen, even if you keep firing way after the plane noses over on its own.
Do same test with the F4U-D (or -1 or -C or -4). The results are almost identical. The only difference is the hog will complain and fight you more than the n1k does below 100mph, but its very easy to keep the nose up. Then, when the speed drops below 40mph the F4U will also "flip" the nose over on its own. IF the pilot tries to compensate it will spin, if he doesnt, it noses down on its own.
And as I said before, if you were in the pre-fm change AH, you would remember that the torque on the F4U was a paramount, ever-present issue. You couldnt even do a LOOP because on the topside the torque would spin you out. You had to chop throttle down to half or 0 on the topmost part to not spin out. That was awesome!
-
I do do that in 109s. In fact you can do this with any light, high engine/weight ratio plane.
109f4 is my favorite because even with gondolas strapped on I can accelerate so fast I'm flying inverted before the first rearm pad (though the E may replace it). And yes, I will follow up a vulcher if they loop over for a second run I will kill them. The speed advantage is almost always overestimated (the chase plane need not zoom as high as the target, and will usually pursue into the stall since being vultched they're probably dead anyway. The target plane must not only zoom higher but does not want to stall as he has flown a long ways and wants to maintain momentum and manuverability).
-
Hrm Tac, I just did that offline in the 38, held fine until about 50 mph where it simply levelled out.
Of course that doesn't matter, because this is a niki flies to the moon thread I guess.
-
Attention Anecdote Ahead!:
[anecdote]
During my initial "get aquainted" flight with the P-38, I could have sworn that I had it slide backwards at the top of a zoom climb without spinning or stalling. I was amazed, and just chaulked it up to conter-rotating props or whatever. I'll have to try that again with all this prop hanging talk.
On the other side of the fence, I had a FW-190 going Vertical under a Ki-61 in the MA. He was asleep at the wheel, and I KNEW I was going to waste him. Anyhow, I was about 80mph, when I pulled the trigger and WHAAAAP! that was the sound of my head hitting the canopy as I spun hard the second I hit the guns. Someone else got the sleeping Ki, and I spun right into a low spits line of fire.
[/anecdote]
Not really usefull as evidence, but sort of on-topic.
-Sikboy
-
Shiden kai is one of the best climbers in the game, because it was in real life . With wep the n1k2 pegs the needle on the roc guage untill you reach about 5k, (as it should) . It also has the ability to hang on it's prop and tailslide downward (as it should), many other planes in AH can do this as well .
Unless you were the one flying the N1k2, what you saw really means nothing, this is an online (internet/worldwidelaggyweb) game .
I am dissapointed that you didn't include the fw109d9 some way in this thread . But please don't let this discourage you, I enjoy reading Monteczuma's replies and hope to see more of them in the future .
-
Originally posted by Samm
I am dissapointed that you didn't include the fw109d9 some way in this thread . But please don't let this discourage you, I enjoy reading Monteczuma's replies and hope to see more of them in the future .
Fess up Samm... you're Monty aren't you :eek:
ooops I mean, our'eya ontymay ren'tay ouyay? Gotta think opsec here! lol
-Sikboy
-
Speaking of 190D9s... wouldn't it be funny if they likewise exhibited this strange, chopper-like ability to stand on their tails and hang there for what seems like ages at very low speeds?
Oh, wait... they do! In my neverending quest to crush ignorance everywhere, I took all of about a minute or two to go test the miraculous flight properties of the so-called "toughest plane to fly" in Aces High.
Here (http://ftp://ftp.wesayni.com/films/D9chopper.zip) is the film of my endeavor, which involves numerous tail stands at 50ias or slower. The Dora likewise seemed to recover very pleasantly from such physically impossible activity.
Attached is a screenshot of me hanging on my prop at N1K-like speeds shortly after takeoff.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
CHEATER!!!!!! :mad:
-
ROFLOL, DMF, in your neverending quest to crush ignorance everywhere you demostraded, again, little or no wishdom.
1 - You used combat trim
2 - 25% fuel
Even with these optimum conditions, what you got is one nasty stall after another, being absolutely unable to keep hung vertically on your prop. And below 100 mph the only thing you do is to kick rudders in a desperate attempt to keep "climbing". This is really different than to keep the nose steady an up.
And you, as usual, forgot one point, the N1K2 not only kept still in the vertical without any violent oscilations (like your case), but then started to fire all the guns like crazy, and no stall at all, just leveled and performed a 180 dgree turn and tried again, this time with success.
Next time, try it with your spit, I'm sure you'll be able to obtain some positive results.
This is the real firing chopper:
The Chopper (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/n1k2.zip)
-
No, see this isn't at all what I was expecting. I expected you to grab from 0 and be inverted OVER the field. This was obviously a mistake on my part in the interpretation. However, after reviewing the films (yours and Dead's) I guess you're arguing that the departure charactoristics are messed up? I don't know, I don't see anything out of the ordinary there.
-Sikboy
-
Mandoble, please tell me you're not so rabid in your pursuit of the phantom niki that you would accuse DMF of using only 25% fuel in the very post where you put a film of you in a niki using 25% fuel?
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
ROFLOL, DMF, in your neverending quest to crush ignorance everywhere you demostraded, again, little or no wishdom.
1 - You used combat trim
2 - 25% fuel[/B]
This N1K that you observed from the tower... are you certain that it used neither 25% fuel nor combat trim? I'd be willing to bet that whoever flew it used exactly the same configuration I used without the artificial restrictions you've just applied to me.
Even with these optimum conditions, what you got is one nasty stall after another, being absolutely unable to keep hung vertically on your prop. And below 100 mph the only thing you do is to kick rudders in a desperate attempt to keep "climbing". This is really different than to keep the nose steady an up.
[/B]
The stalls were anything but nasty. In every case, at around 40ias nose straight up, the Dora would flip inverted and then level out just fine; I didn't need to fight it at all.
Second, what's wrong with "kicking rudders" in order to keep the plane stationary in the vertical plane? I'm guessing you were zoomed in so far on the N1K who performed this manuever that you were capable of seeing whether or not he used his rudders to stabilize when he got exceptionally slow. Or a more reasonable explanation, of course, would be that this is exactly what the N1K was doing in order to maintain his tail stand. I'm also curious which film you were watching where I was "absolutely unable to keep hung vertically," because I counted in each instance a period of at least two to three seconds where the plane stood practically stationary on its tail before it lost enough speed to stall out.
And you, as usual, forgot one point, the N1K2 not only kept still in the vertical without any violent oscilations (like your case), but then started to fire all the guns like crazy, and no stall at all, just leveled and performed a 180 dgree turn and tried again, this time with success.
[/B]
I experienced no "violent oscilations" in the vertical plane except right at the very end when the plane would flip over at about 40ias. Then it was a simple matter of diving for speed to about 180ias and pulling straight vertical again... essentially replicating what you've described with the N1K. The Dora has a very capable prop hanging ability.
Next time, try it with your spit, I'm sure you'll be able to obtain some positive results.
[/B]
If by positive results you mean a replication of the sorts of results I found with the Dora, then you're most likely correct. It seems to me that what we have going on here is a flight model issue, not a particular plane model issue. That you single out particular planes for scrutiny merely reveals your own biases.
Thanks for the N1K film, I'll check it out and comment on it when I get a chance.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Umm..fatty, the P-38 is supposed to do that. It can do that thanks to its counter rotating props. Now, kindly do the same in a n1k. Aside from it dipping the wing as it noses down on its own, its the same thing as a 38. From what I know, the n1k on such situation should enter a spin just as bad as the pony's flat spin (which is a real bich to recover from).
-
Why do you say that Tac ?
-
I'm not just talking quick recovery, the nose doesn't even dip below the horizon Tac. Not even the rumors about the heliniki can match that.
A soft recovery like in mandoble's film can be done in any plane, as long as you let off in time. If you guys are saying that a smaller more manueverable plane has a lower stall speed than a heavier one built for a higher top speed, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with you and again question just what exactly is wrong there?
-
Just played around with the n1k2 and p51d . The p51d handled just as well as the n1k2 or better recovering from "hanging on the prop" . Neither one of them would do an bellybutton first dive like a zeke or yak though . You are right though p51 is one of the few planes in AH that will actually go into a spin if you push it too hard .
One thing I like to do if I'm in a zeke or yak that is leaking fuel or smoking is hang on the prop and then tail slide back down through my own smoke .
-
Neg Fatty, I simply used same parameters, but no rudder support at all, and firing at the top. Look at the sun movements to verify how steady was the n1k2 up to 0 mph, and still firing.
-
Well, DMF, it is clear that u have not seen my film, cause there is nothing in common with yours in the results. you were driving a brick with no hope to aim and fire at anything below 100mph, check the n1k2 film and try to do the same with a D9.
And I didnt kick the rudders to keep vertical even near 0 mph, in your film it is clear that you need to overcorrect all the time, with noticeable and clear oscilations making impossible any aiming and firing attempt. In the other hand, you didn't got hung at any moment, you went from a very accidented climb to a violent stall.
-
0 mph? Mandoble you never go less than 25 mph in your film.
You only stop climbing when you turn and dive. You haven't shown any stopping and hovering at all. Try holding the nose up till you hit 0 mph and start a tailslide, see how long you hover in place at 0 mph.
--)-FLS----
Musketeers
-
The question was rhetorical Mandoble.
You did in fact cite DMF as only using 25% fuel as if that was a factor to discount his test, then you did in fact post a film of your niki test which you used only 25% fuel.
-
You are right FLS.
Fatty, DMF was doing a direct comparisong with D9, cause that I used same parameters but I added a very important point: firing the guns.
-
"I'm not just talking quick recovery, the nose doesn't even dip below the horizon Tac"
P-38 has excellent accel from 0 to 200mph fatty. chances are by the time your nose is close to above horizon you are already going at 100 mph or more. The 38's "stall" in that situation is a gentle nose down, no pilot input needed. Also, P-38 stall speed is amongst the lowest of the planes modeled in AH (if not THE lowest of any fighter).
Now again, its counter-rot. props eliminate the rolling from torque, bigger wings, very low stall speed... Yet see ze n1k,with 1 engine (1990HP, very powerful) on a light airframe, on full wep does not have any control problems on the way up nor on the way down when at very low speeds (100mph and lower). My question to you is, why?
Try the same on a 109.. or a 190. Even a P-51 will enter into a spin easily below 80 mph. In a n1k you dont even have to worry until you reach 20 mph, and even then it is YOU who can cause the spin by pulling hard on the stick (ive pulled and rolled the n1k at near 0 mph without being spinned, it only seems to enter a spin if you REALLY pull on that stick).
-
First, none of the other planes are even in the same category as the p38 in terms of coming out of a vertical stall as if nothing happened. I'm not saying that this is incorrect, simply pointing it out.
Second, any of the lighter planes in aces high can perform as well as and many can do better than mandoble's example. No, the p51 can't do as well, and I would not expect any of the heavier airframes to recover from a stall as quickly. You have to try pretty hard to get it in a flat spin though. The 109 not only can you do it but then pull over the rest of the way to come out easily inverted. This starting from a standstill on the runway.
If you want to argue that none of the planes in aces high (single prop) stall as badly as they should that is one thing. If you believe that the n1k2 can do this amazing thing that no other plane can do on the other hand, you're flat wrong.
-
Originally posted by Tac
Now again, its counter-rot. props eliminate the rolling from torque, bigger wings, very low stall speed... Yet see ze n1k,with 1 engine (1990HP, very powerful) on a light airframe, on full wep does not have any control problems on the way up nor on the way down when at very low speeds (100mph and lower). My question to you is, why?
Well for one thing that is untrue, every plane in AH has control problems below 100mph . If I understand you correctly your argument is that the departure characteristics of the n1k2 are too gentle. Tell us why you think that . Yes it has good departure characteristic as to be expected, but not as good the spitfires, hurris, zero, 202 and p38 . If you've found something that you can do in a n1k2 that you can't do in another plane, film it and let us see it please .
-
samm, answer the Q I asked fatty.
1990HP, light airframe.. and yet it has no problems getting to 20mph hangin on prop. Why doesnt it tumble on itself and enter into a spin (as say, the 190's, 109s and p51's)? Its also supposed to have automatic flaps.. they sure aint draggin' it down it seems (if they are modeled in the first place).
"If you've found something that you can do in a n1k2 that you can't do in another plane"
As I said above, many single engined monster HP planes have this oddity. The n1k just has the gentlest handling at lowest speed of the whole bunch. F4U is the other best example of the allied rides. A plane that would kill its pilots at low speeds because of its torque.. and in AH you have to be pulling REAL hard, you have to work at getting that thing to spin. All im asking is whats up with that?
"Well for one thing that is untrue, every plane in AH has control problems below 100mph "
Problems as in "oh sheet!" or as in "heeey its starting to roll a lil' bit, how cute!" ?
"heavier airframes to recover from a stall as quickly"
Erm, correct me if im wrong please. But doesnt a light airframe with a powerful engine enter a stall/spin much easier than a heavy plane with a powerful engine? As far as recovery, yes, the lighter plane would be able to recover quicker... imo if he manages to chop the engine off to stop tumbling than a heavier airframe.
-
I'm not going to argue aces high's flight model mechanics. I have no clue how close it is to reality.
I do know how planes perform within this game in relation to each other however, and the title of this thread and its general premise that the n1k2 is doing wild things the rest of the AH planeset is incapable of is incorrect.
-
Tac, to your more than correct comments about engine power vs weight, add that n1k2 done that while firing 20mm guns in the vertical. And yep Fatty, some (not many) other planes can do the same, but these are planes with much less potent engines. Look at the D9 example, 2200 hp, but much heavier plane. Both, D9 and N1k2 went below stall speeds in the climbs, but n1k2 kept there nose up and firing and D9 started to go side by side and stalled (no firing and a lot of rudder needed to keep it climbing).
A last note my film:
1 - It is a direct response to DMF affirmation that D9 can do the same.
2 - It is not intended to demostrate what I've said in my first post. Conditions are different. While the attacking N1K2 had a clear reference point to keep in the vertical (F6F centered in its sight), me and DMF had nothing except the sun (not in the vertical).
DMF take note of this: With your D9, you keep with a nose up attitude for 3 or 4 secs once below 100mph, with N1K2 I got an average of NINE secs and firing ... that is the difference between a brick and a hovering chopper.
-
Try it in the new emil Mandoble, it's almost exactly the same as the niki (in my newfound experience). I've also gotten pretty close in an A8 (Film here) (http://home.earthlink.net/~acesarz3/A8chopper.zip) Of course it was a LOT harder in the A8, but EVERYTHING is a lot harder to do in the A8. If I were inclined to complain about the FM, I'd be a LOT more suspicious of the Hog (didn't get a chance to try that last night, not a lot of free time when I'm not at work lol) But in the end, I don't see what all the ado is about.
-Sikboy
-
Your A8 zip file is empty. Have you got 9 seconds of vertical climbing and firing with the A8 at below 100 mph?
-
I can do it with the G10, NP.
-
ammo, what about posting the film? ;)
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Your A8 zip file is empty. Have you got 9 seconds of vertical climbing and firing with the A8 at below 100 mph?
While I did not time it, I do think the film is COMPARABLE to what you had in the Niki. Yes, I did use rudder to keep it level, but I also had to do this in the Niki (and in your film, so do you btw) And I had to be more gentle in the revovery, but Yes, I do have a "nose-up verticle guns firing at the top of the zoom no-spin recovery" in the A8. Was the duration as long or longer than the Niki? Probably not. Was the recovery as easy in the niki? No, not at all. The Emil was as easy to hang as the Niki, but not sure if it was "9 seconds of verticle climbing and firing... below 100mph" But to my mind it was enough to convince me that if this is a FM mistake, it's a universal mistake and not something fundamentally wrong with the Niki model.
Is the niki best at this move? Perhaps (although personally I believe that the P-38 is better, and rightly so if Tac's analysis is correct.) But that doesn't mean that anything is wrong any more than the fact that the Zeke and SpitV are the best at low speed turns, Or that the Pony is master of E retention, or whatever other property that any other plane is best at. To me, the A8 is best at vaporizing unsuspecting airplanes, and I love it for that.
I guess I could ask "Did planes really just dissapear in a fireball when the A8 opened up on them from d100? But I don't. I just fly it that way.
Nikis seem to pose no threat to you what so ever, so I guess I'm really confused as to why you've seemingly targeted them?
A quick note on Anecdotal evidence:
Ealier in the thread I mentioned a flight where I was climbing hard on an unsuspecting Ki-61 and when I pulled the trigger, I spun hard. That's why I tried this exercise in the 190-A8, to see if I was right. But I was very wrong. This is possible in the A8, so looking back, I probably moved the joystick hard to get a better lead on the Ki, and that quick input put me into the spin.
-Sikboy
PS: I'll try to post the film again when I get home tonight.
-
I cant tell anything about your film before seeing it. But based on the DMF film with 190D9, I doubt you keep with the 190A8 nose up and firing more than 2 or 3 secs once below 100 mph.
The "hovering" is just that, to keep too much time veritcally nose up and below stall speed even firing the guns. You can pick up any plane and climb vertically untill stalled, but this is not the question.
In the other hand, I would not be surprised if the two engined P38 is better than N1K2 in this move, just the contrary, P38 should be better. Probably, as well, as our new 110.
-
Sorry, I wasn't going by time I was going by speed, trying to get the A8 as close to 0 as possible before rolling back over. When I repost the film I'm sure you'll find something wrong with it, and that's cool, but to my mind it shows the A8 doing essentially the same thing as the Niki, only not as well. But then, that's exactly what I said in my last post.
-Sikboy
-
hahem ...
Can someone explain me this thread in simple word I can understand ?
All I see is that different planes that handle differently at slow speed ...
I don't expect anything else as they are ... guess what ... different ?
or did I get lost somewhere in this thread ?
-
Straffo, Tac explanation is very good. But I will do my best to clarify the point.
N1K2J had a very powerfull engine (more than 1900 Hp) for a very light airframe. In the vertical, once you are well below stall speed, there are little or no resistance from the airframe against the engine rotation, so the plane would start rotating acording with the engine with little or no control (propwash alone). If you want to overcompensate that effect, you will need to apply a lot or ruder and aileron, and even cutting the throttle. All these are unnecesary with the N1K2. And to make the effect more evident, I added firing guns, supposedly shaking the airframe and adding a braking factor.
If you try this move with most of the planes (even planes with much less Hp/weight ratio), you will find yourself needed too much overcompensation to keep in the vertical to have any aiming chance, much worse if u fire the guns at the same time.
For example, in the DMF film, a D9 kept there for 3 or 4 secs (and not firing) while the N1K2 kept for 9 secs. Not only that, but N1K2 needed no pilot effort at all to keep nose up in the vertical well below stall speed.
In planes like P38 one engine compensates the other one, so, keeping controled in the vertical at very low speeds should be much easier.
-
Will do mandoble, I have made two films of just that, however they were too big even zipped to attach using the BBS function. I will get it done soon. (at work)
-
I got it now :)
Btw did someone check how the Zeke handle in such a case ?
-
Originally posted by Tac
A plane that would kill its pilots at low speeds because of its torque.
I thought that it was killing when near stall speed (at landing and so at low alt ) and when passing rapiditly (sp?) from idle to full power ?
I was believing that it was the rapid change in torque (or p-stream effect) who was hard to handle ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
I thought that it was killing when near stall speed (at landing and so at low alt ) and when passing rapiditly (sp?) from idle to full power ?
I was believing that it was the rapid change in torque (or p-stream effect) who was hard to handle ?
My faulty memory recalls this being a takeoff problem, when the Ensigns would punch the throttle as if it were an AT-6. But we all know how reliable my memory is
-Sikboy
-
at least we agree on the throttle variation :D
-
This is mostly addressed to Tac, since we're all pretty much in agreement that Mandoble won't concede to reason.
Well the p51 does not go into a spin when you hang it on it's prop . I allready said the the p51 is just as easy if not easier than the n1k2 to do this with, try it, it doesn't tumble on itself and enter a spin. The 190 is even more docile, it basically recovers itself .
Why do you think the weight to hp ratio should dictate a planes departure characteristics ? Light planes with powerfull engines (190, 109, yak, spit) are difficult to spin, in fact in AH they never spin . The only planes that I've ever gotten to spin in AH are heavy planes, the p51 and f4u and f6f, although I've heard the p38 will but I've never gotten it to spin for me .
Why do you think the n1k2 should behave like the p51 when none of the other planes do ? Why do you think a light plane with a powerful engine should have worse departure characteristics than a relatively heavy plane ? Please explain.
Nobody so far has been able to get the n1k2 to do anything unusual . All we have is mandoble saying that he saw one "hover" like a helicopter while standing in a tower, I think that speaks for itself .
And of course any plane moving slower than 100mph in AH will have stability and controll problems . That's why they have flaps .
-
Ummmm Mandoble. You might wanna check your preconceptions with some actual data. You keep quote the horspower of the N1K2-J, and calling it a "very light airframe".
From the AH Help Pages:
N1K2-J
Normal loaded weight: 9040 lbs
Fw 190D-9
Normal loaded weight: 9414 lbs
So using your numbers of 1990 hp for N1K2, and the 2200 hp for the D9, if give you powerloading numbers of 4.54 lbs/hp for the N1K2 and 4.28 lbs/hp for the D9.
This would indicate from your arguement that the D9 should have more torque than the N1K2, which is does in AH.
Now, in my opinon (and I stress opinon), I agree with you that the N1K2 doesn't exhibit as much "torque effect" as it probably should. But the arguement that your basing your conclusion upon is flawed.
I think you have the right answer, but for the wrong reason. :)
-
The 190's are more apt to wing over in stalls than n1k2, I've noticed all the high wingload planes have that tendancy, but that has nothing to with torque . The n1k2 does have substantial torque . When you attempt to hang one on it's prop you notice this . As dynamic pressure decreases on the controll surfaces as your speed decreases the plane requires more and more aileron to compensate for the torque, try it .
Ask yourself this, which is more influencial of how prop torque affects the aircraft, hp/weight ratio, or propweight/acweight ratio ?
Also when doing these manuevers the prop is no longer accelerating, it's stabalized at max rpm so inertia is on it's side so you're not going to see any drastic torque effects . You may see some oscillation when in a nose high attitude at low speeds but thats not due to torque I think that is related to gyroscopic behavior of the prop .
-
umm..samm, any 190 will spin or have one hell of a time at slow speeds because of its torque. I have a miserable time sciscoring in them because of it (and 'cause im used to the 38). But try it in a n1k.. bleh, ye can keep pulling all you want way below 100mph without entering into a spin.
As far as the P-51, when you nose it up till stall, if you leave it on its own it enters into a real nasty flat spin. Happens to me almost all the time (some times it does wing over and nose down, but you will have one heck of a problem trying to keep it under control until it speeds up beyond 100mph. In short, if you wanted to do an evasive or pull nose up just after the nose flipped earthward, you'd spin the plane).
"Light planes with powerfull engines (190, 109, yak, spit) are difficult to spin, in fact in AH they never spin "
Eh? All those , with the exception of the spit do spin quite easily at speeds below 100mph. The yak9U will give you one hell of a time keeping it under control, but its a great little accelerator from 0 to 200mph (almost like the 38) so it regain speeds quickly.
Here's something that happened to me just last night, I really wish I wouldve filmed it. On the field thats just above the port of the SE corner country (bish last night) Kappa, Fester and I were on vulch pattern as the goon arrived to town. 2 fighters came from high so I went to HO em before they got the goon.. thankfully, those 2 cons entertained themselves with the 12k buffs we had overhead as the goon dropped. I return to field and see a n1k just taking off.. im about 6k above the field flying at 200mph do a shallow dive to it.. n1k is level, barely a few hundred ft off the dirt.. get within d800 from it, im 300mph, n1k does a hard turn to evade me when I get to d500, i pull straight up. Look behind me and LO and behold the lil' n1k has its nose straight up pointed at me.. and it had closed in to d400'ish before I started my zoom up.. I look back d450...d480...d500.. n1k is firing like mad.. d550 ... d600.. n1k is STILL pointing nose up.. my speed is 150'ish... d650.... d700.. I start to pull nose over with 2 notches of flaps as my speed drops below 100mph, n1k is STILL pointing nose up AND firing.. D650 (im starting to go down).. d600 n1k STILL has nose up!!! And this is when he scores a toejamload of hits on me and whacks me down. This is what confuses the hell outta me. I saw him TAKE OFF. He may have leveled and WEP'd for the 3 to 5 seconds it took me to close in on him.. and yet he has enough speed to turn hard, turn nose up and hang on prop for the whole time a P-38 zooms up, loses all its superior E on the zoom up and flips over? Thats like 10 to 12 seconds hanging on that prop man, FIRING all the way. I went to DA right after that and tried it. Hell yes, the n1k does that, all the way down to 20mph with no control problems, you can even WIGGLE the damn tail to aim at your leisure. *bangs head on wall* DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER! :p
-
Well Tac, I'm hardly suprised, considering I have stated in this thread using the exact same tactic when vultched (except with 109s instead of n1k2s)
And Mandoble I still don't see the problem that planes with higher stall speeds can't hold the angle at as low a speed as planes with lower stall speeds.
-
I think you are confusing wing over stalls (accelerated) with spins, especially if happening when doing scissors, which btw has nothing to do with torque, you can pull wingover stalls in a 190 with the engine off .
I did four consecutive 0mph tail stands in p51d yesterday right after take off, not once did I need to apply remedial action.
I have spun p51's before, but not doing verticle manuevers, that's not to say that one can't .
If you have evidence that the n1k2 is doing things that a toejam hot fighter plane shouldn't be able to do, bring it .
-
anyone ever hear about unintentional acceleration Incidents?
-Sikboy
-
Samm, the problem is not being able to go to 0 mph and still nose up, but the time you are able to keep in this attitude once you are below 100mph in the vertical. That is what I saw from the tower and that is what Tac is describing, exactly the same thing. Repeat your tests with your P51 and count the seconds from 100mph to control loose, if you are able to get to 9 seconds while firing and without cutting the throttle then your P51 handles like a n1k2.
Fatty, in the vertical, if you have enough air flow you will be able to handle your plane. Basically, if you are above stall you would expect to have a good control, but below that air speed you are more and more dependent of the prop wash to have some air flow to make your surface controls effective. If not enough prop wash, then your will need to open even more the throttle, increasing the torque effect and the effect of the egine in your airframe. The more heavier the airframe, the more tendency to keep in its current pos (inertia) and the more difficult to make it to spin with your prop.
Verm, do you know what is the weight of a 25% fuel loaded N1K2 compared to a 25% loaded 190D9? What is what you consider "normal loaded"?
-
Originally posted by Tac
umm..samm, any 190 will spin or have one hell of a time at slow speeds because of its torque.
No it won't spin, yes you will have on hell of a time controlling it at slow speeds . And no torque is not the culprit .
The only time prop torque should affect the aircraft substantialy is durring acceleration, that is prop acceleration, not airspeed acceleration .
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Samm, the problem is not being able to go to 0 mph and still nose up, but the time you are able to keep in this attitude once you are below 100mph in the vertical. That is what I saw from the tower and that is what Tac is describing, exactly the same thing. Repeat your tests with your P51 and count the seconds from 100mph to control loose, if you are able to get to 9 seconds while firing and without cutting the throttle then your P51 handles like a n1k2.
The p51 has a much poorer thrust/weight than n1k2, why wouldn't I expect it to begin falling sooner ?
-
Originally posted by Samm
The p51 has a much poorer thrust/weight than n1k2, why wouldn't I expect it to begin falling sooner ?
Because the P51 has much less drag than N1K2, and this is also an inportant factor in the deceleration.
-
Damnit Mandoble you do this every week !
You see what you've done again ? You've made a claim that the n1k2 has powers way off the charts "miracle helicopter" . Based on your suspect anecdotal IN THE TOWER witness of a plane ONLINE doing something supposedly impossible under nebulous circumstances . Now we are down to timing tail stands, splitting hairs, with stop watches, considering gun recoil (lol) . And you still are no closer to conceding any bit . Yet nobody is able to produce any evidence that the n1k2 is doing anything wrong, let alone come anywhere close to your first argument of it's helicopter flight ability .
At first when I saw some of the responses to you in your other threads I thought "hey that was kind of mean, give the guy a chance" . But after reading through your obssesive weekly, sometimes daily complaints .
Friggin: "weapon bank selection circuitry of 190s"
"190d9 lacks elevator authority, becuase that's how it FEELS to me" "
"Pyro look at this pic of a 190 cockpit, the airspeed indicator goes to 900kmh" :confused:
Now I can totally relate to these guys. You're like that guy who kept sending junk that he had dug out of his back yard to the Smithsonian institute . This is why nobody takes you seriously anymore .
Dude I hate to sound harsh, or like I'm putting people down, but you know what ? I hope you don't stop making these absurd threads becuase I find them quite entertaining .
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Because the P51 has much less drag than N1K2, and this is also an inportant factor in the deceleration.
Really it does ? What is the drag coefficient of the n1k2 ? Or are you just talking out your anus again?
Not that drag has any substantial affect on how an airplane falls out of a tail stand . Besides we're talking about increasing the time to distance ratio here so increased air resistance would be a good thing .
-
Ok, Samm, the P51 has worse drag factor than N1K2. Happy now?
And no one except you has been talking about tail slides.
LOL, and no, no one except you (again) is talking about increasing the time to distance ratio. Distance is irrelevant. Time with good control nose up at speeds below 100mph, no matter if you travel 100 km or 10 meters.
-
musta been a long time ago that you saw that niki from the tower though. This has been bugging you for a while now
it's like Deja Vu all over again! (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=161783#post161783)
-Sikboy
-
LOL Sikboy, I saw that a lot of times while flying, but the other day from the tower it was impressively clear.
-
fatty id love to see your 109 hanging for entire seconds below 50mph FIRING and wiggling tail to aim. With WEP on.
I never been able to keep it below 60mph, the thing is just too hard to keep from rolling downwards & spining if you dont nose down.
-
109e and 109f with gondolas from standstill on runway. (http://home.flash.net/~collis/films/109s.zip) The e I noticed afterwards was not truly vertical, I was using the sun at noon as an aiming point. But that's too bad, this is as much effort as I'm going to put into this silliness.
-
Thanks for the film, Fatty. As in the case of the 190D9 video, you were able to keep nose up for 2-4 secs once below 100mph.
Again, this has little in common with the 9 secs of the n1k2.
Sikboy, your film is still empty.
-
Yeah, I can't get it to upload. And it's no longer on my priority list, after watching this thread unfold, I'll just leave it up to the court of public opinion.
-Sikboy
-
G10, 11 seconds
-
ammo, do you call that a steady vertical climb? Again not more than 5-6 secs more or less vertical and with control below 100 mph, at about 50 mph your plane started to roll over its axis. If you look at the N1K2 film (last climb shows it very clearly) you will notice no roll at all until the top.
Ah, and that G10 doesnt seem to be firing the guns. Thanks for the film. IMO, the only one that, probably, may keep near N1K2 results is the P38 and, surprisingly, the Typh.
-
OK, file uploaded (had to take it to work). But before you watch it, keep in mind that I don't expect this to change your mind. Changing your mind is like changing underwear without taking your pants off. It's not going to happen, and it's just going to make you look like a maniac. But hrere's the film. Get you stopwatch out, to ensure timing. Notice that I don't fire the guns in the first attempt, but do in the second. Also notice that I use less rudder in these than you do in the N1K2. This is full fuel (don't know if I used WEP, but I should have, would probably have given me an extra second or two in the verticle). Anyhow, I offer the film so that anyone who has read this thread, but hadn't already made up their mind can look and judge for themselves if the difference between the N1K2/Dora/A8/G10 in a verticle climb is sufficient to warrent all the attention we've given it.
Once again, let me state: This film does not show that the A8 is as good as the N1K2 in the specified test. I believe however, that is shows similar enough performance to dismiss the contention that the N1K2 is somehow porked. If there is a porking (and I'm not saying that there is) it would be with the flight model in general, and not any aircraft specifically.
-Sikboy
film posted here (http://home.earthlink.net/~acesarz3/A8chopper.zip)
-
Thanks for the film, once again I can count only 4 secs below 100mph and before lossing the control and the vertical. These more or less 4 secs seem to be common for any version of 109s and 190s. All of them are far from the 9 secs of the n1k2.
The point is, do u notice a very clear difference between the tested planes and the N1K2 in the vertical where almost no altitude is gained (less than 100mph). Do you notice the fine control and stability of N1K2 compared with the other planes?
Is that correct? perhaps, but by direct comparison the difference
is really a lot (the double in time).
-
No, I honestly didn't notice. But I don't have a stopwatch, and I'll trust that you do. Trying to be fair (and undoubtedly failing) I thought I had more like 5-6 seconds in the E-Pig, vs. 8-9 seconds in the N1k2. But the films are there. Anyone who wishes can judge for themselves.
Funny though:
Originally Exaggerated by Mandoble
At some point, clearly visible from the tower, the N1K2 stopped climbing, but kept nose up, freezed in the sky, pointing at the F6F and then started to fire like mad, still stopped in the air pointing vertically up. The F6F dodged the shoots and the N1K2 simply leveled and performed a 180 degree turn to repeat the vertical spraying zoom
Now; read that post, look at the films. Funny how we've gone from a hoovering, zero E loss N1K2 to counting 9 second verticle climbs under 100mph. Amazing.
-Sikboy
-
What is amazing is your interpretation of what you read. No 0 E loose comments unless I cant even read the most simple english.
And you have a clock measuring secons just in the film player.
Any way, take your own conclussions, as I've stated before I have no interest at all into convincing you about what I see.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
What is amazing is your interpretation of what you read. No 0 E loose comments unless I cant even read the most simple english.
Yes, I thought this would come up. When you claim that "N1K2 simply leveled and performed a 180 degree turn to repeat the vertical spraying zoom" I took that to mean that it leveled out, turned and repeated the manuever. Not that it dropped 1000 feet, built up 200 mph, and repeated the manuever"
Here's a pretty picture to show you what I thought you were complaining about. Now that I know what you are complaining it cracks me up that we've spent this much time on it. Thank god I'm getting paid for this.
-Sikboy
-
MAndoble, I started that film when the AC slowed to 100 IAS (for file size). Prior to starting the film I rolled from the runway and accelerated to 200IAS gradually pulling the nose up. The AC was vertical (definition-nose pointing up) for 11 seconds. Firing the guns will not do anything to slow this down. In addition, this is just a cut from the larger film in which I was able climb, stall, recover and repeat all the way to 10K in about 1.5 minutes. The G10 is the true "chopper monster". As it should be, it has a superior horsepower to weight ratio.
regards
-
Sikboy, your interpretation powers are really fascinating. I never posted the video of what I've seen from the tower. So, your "mandoland / what is seen in the film" is just sikboydreamland.
Hey boy, N1k2 is not a glider, it has a 1900hp engine more than capable to speed up the plane without needing to dive away.
The pattern you describe in your nice picture is perfectly possible to achieve with any plane, you only need to be skillfull enough to level your plane when you have still enough control (using flaps or whatever) to not enter in a stall. just level, let the engine to build up E and invert that E (speed) into a new climb.
ammo, why is that firing is not going to do have any braking effect?
-
Whatever, it's not what you did in the film. And for what it's worth I CAN'T take a plane up in a verticle climb, get anyhwere CLOSE to 0mph, and "level out" without losing altitude (about 1000 feet most of the time). You either get your 9 second verticle "hover" or you get to pull out without losing alt. Pick or choose. And don't call me "boy" love muffin. Go ahead and cry to the moon-rocks if that's whats going to make you feel better, but try not to be too crestfallen when you wake up each morning, and it still isn't changed.
-Sikboy
-
Ammo, how much did you have to work at keeping the G10's nose up when below 100mph? At what speed did it actually become real hard to keep nose up? (im assuming you had WEP on).
Firing the guns does kick MPH off your plane too.
-
Mandy this thread has shown the readers that it is obvious that the n1k2 does not do what you claim to have seen one do . But we all knew that from the beginning didn't we ? Indeed the very first reply in this thread raises the BS banner . And while it was entertaining while it lasted this thread has becoming boring .
So please move on, it's time for another Mandoble episode .
-
9 seconds mandoble? Who are you kidding?
I just had to watch it again to see if there was some bit on the end I might have missed. You must be still counting when the tracers are headed off 90 degrees to the left. Even counting the stall down you don't ever come close to that, although you probably could have held it longer if you didn't use combat trim. Had I known it was a timed event I might have even accelerated faster than 100mph before pulling vertical.
Anyway, you have gone far too far off the deep end for even me, I'm off to some other thread.
-
LOL well if every second was measured at double the rate..
Seriously though I can hang a HurriC on the prop much longer than I can a NIK. The NIK comes off the stall easier than the hurriC, but even the hurri is not hard to get back under control.
I find the NIK will drop to the side makin it more difficult to keep pointin up, whereas in the hurri you can hang it there until it drops straight back down tail first.
SKurj
-
Originally posted by Tac
Ammo, how much did you have to work at keeping the G10's nose up when below 100mph? At what speed did it actually become real hard to keep nose up? (im assuming you had WEP on).
Firing the guns does kick MPH off your plane too.
CC, I used alot of rudder and aleron inputs. Yes the guns do affect it, however I dont think enough to take away from the relevancy of it.
-
Cc. now take a n1k and do the same. Its a tame popsiclecat right up until it hits the 20mph mark. WEP and if you want, guns firing too.
-
What did you expect,, the damn n1k flies easily at 40ias, will even bank 30 degrees easily at that speed. I've strafed n1ks at rotation and they just follow you up on your 300+ pass. Like the spit being able to rotate 130-140 deg@50ias at apex and maintain level flight then they just cannon you with the outside gun firing inside your turn.