Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Creamo on May 02, 2001, 10:55:00 AM
-
Everyone for their first 25 hours of the new tour fly G10's (you think a Niki can climb? chew gum, your ears are going to pop fukin out in WEP), 190a8's for HO action, 190a5's for a little turning and HO'ing, 190a8's for complete base destruction, and the Dora for pure domination and speed.
Please try, combat trim OFF unlike alot of LW whining experts, and see what these BEASTS can do.
The Luftard conspirators are about to meet their match...the truth.
Piss off btw you whiners. I like the Chog perked, but your glee is about making me puke.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
I've always flown with CT off, I usually fly planes that aren't common... guess that means I've got big nuttz too and a schlong that sways from side to side like a 4 foot 3" diameter hose...
Give it a diddlyin rest (not you Creamo), it doesn't matter what or how someone elses flies.
-SW
-
Yeah I agree with what Chunky here said! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I agree.. CT always was and always will be off.
the G10 rules
FDB's... well...
-
Originally posted by Creamo:
Everyone for their first 25 hours of the new tour fly G10's, 190a8's for HO action, 190a5's for a little turning and HO'ing, 190a8's for complete base destruction, and the Dora for pure domination and speed.
Please try, combat trim OFF unlike alot of LW whining experts, and see what these BEASTS can do.
Also, I look at naked men pictures.
Bahh, why fly all those planes when you can fly a nikki. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Can't help you with the picture thing though. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
[This message has been edited by hblair (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
LoL yes please do as he suggests and you'll eventually realise just how much of an advantage the F4uc has!
190a8 loadout 500kg(1100lb) 2x13mm 4x20mm 780 rds(rockets air to air so n/a) 20mm or 30mm will have no effect vs Ground vehicles
F4UC loadout 2x1000lbs 4x20mm 800+rds +4 rockets (500lb equivalent?) 20mm will kill any vehicle on the ground.
one small never answered question:
I have never seen an F4UC with 1000lbers on the central pylons(each wing) becuase as far as i can tell the F4UD had these fitted and was the whole point of the D model.did the f4Uc have special hardpoints for the bombs? I can find no reference to it.
Also I have always seen references to the F4Ud having either bombs OR rockets not both.
To prove im not just attacking your favourite plane only i have also read a lot on the Ju88a4 and most books say it can carry 4,409lbs and ours carries 6000+.Is this correct?
------------------
Hazed
3./JG2 (http://members.home.net/winyah999/3jg2.htm)
[This message has been edited by hazed- (edited 05-02-2001).]
[This message has been edited by hazed- (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
lol HB you are truly a sick individual (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
<S>
-
Originally posted by Creamo:
Everyone for their first 25 hours of the new tour fly G10's (you think a Niki can climb? chew gum, your ears are going to pop fukin out in WEP), 190a8's for HO action, 190a5's for a little turning and HO'ing, 190a8's for complete base destruction, and the Dora for pure domination and speed.
The difference, Creamo, is that the G10 is SUPOSSED to climb like a rocket, and way faster than the N1K2. It climbs faster than the Niki, true...but I think that the "WAY" got lost somewhere after 1.03 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
And Fw190A5 for turning.....lol.....lol....co ming from a N1K2 driver that is funny toejam,man (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Please try, combat trim OFF unlike alot of LW whining experts, and see what these BEASTS can do.
Nah, people, dont lose ur heads on this one. He is talking about me using CT on the 109 (mostly) and 190 (way less) for some time (I think it was about one TOD) like 2-3 weeks after the new FM came.
I noticed that my skills were turned into toejam after the FM change, and I used the CT to worry about my flying only, not about manual trimming. BTW This was no secret at that time (said it quite many times in knit and open channel), happens that I posted a screenshot here wich showed CT on and Creamo got an orgasm on it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
As soon as I got a hand on the new FM the CT was instantly unmapped from my key settings. IT has remained this way since...huhmm...mid October to now how much time is it?...
Creamy,BTW I have almost 200 films to proof it...wanna some? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Sorry for the coitus interruptus this time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
Creamo said:
"fukin"
then he said:
"LW whining experts"
and later said:
"Luftard conspirators"
and lastly said:
"Piss off btw you whiners"
Back on 2000.1.20 Creamo said:
"It’s still a game, so relax a little"
Maybe you should listen to yourself more. I know that I am tired of listening to you.
-
Mickey when reading creamo, just remember this:
Dont take a single of his posts seriously. Because he doesnt (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Yes, Yes! MORE REALISM! Turn CT OFF!
That way, using the electrically adjustable, motor-driven aileron and rudder trim tabs on the 109 (and other aircraft that didn't have them) that this game and a keyboard/programable stick provide will show the rest of the world how MANLY you are!
Realism! Yeah!
You guys crack me up. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Mick, dont be obsessed...thats weird.
[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Toad:
That way, using the electrically adjustable, motor-driven aileron and rudder trim tabs on the 109 (and other aircraft that didn't have them) that this game and a keyboard/programable stick provide will show the rest of the world how MANLY you are!
Realism! Yeah!
You guys crack me up. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
If you ask me, Toad. Yes. I would like the slats on the 109s regardless the assimetrical deployement. I would like no trim on my 190 (only elevator trim changed during the flight, and that was AUTOMATIC). Neither in the early 109s.However the 109G10 had rudder trim, so you might wanna revise that statement. I would like **ALL** the planes to have the true trim controls their RL Counterparts had.
Of course I would like aswell the "good" parts. For instance I would like to see the legendary stability of the 190 all around the speed envelope (it had fixed tabs on aileron and rudder because it was very stable. The current 190 has a marked tendence to roll right when accelerating that I really doubt the true one had).
I would like aswell to see realistic engine management.noooooooo I dont mean engine overheating if too much use ,etc etc etc. I mean engine MANAGEMENT. So you have to take care about RPMs, Mixture and Manifold pressure at the same time. Of course the 190 had that Kommandogërat (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif), wich its good side (less pilot workload) and downside (less range because the automatic control).
And I would like realistic ammo counters too. That is NO ammo counter except on the german planes. And more limited six views than the ones we currently have. And no icon range under 1K to make true the need for "Hartmann's solution" unless you are a true marksman (Wich,BTW I'm not).
Yes, Toad, I would like all those things. Good or bad, better or worse. I know I wont get them, at least not all of them, in AH.
But I would like them.
-
it's a GAME...
would you rather fight or
spend time trimming, changing settings, etc..
I personally think that'd be rather boring.
I'm here for the competition.. ACM skills vs. ACM skills...
not spending all my time changing settings and such.
You can get all that in a boxed offline sim.
[This message has been edited by Wlfgng (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
In light of that silly outburst Toad, (sheesh Im going to order you the "Auto-dependancy" tape American Airlines makes its mechanics and pilots watch where it proves modern airliner captains will reach for the autopilot knobs EVEN in simulated collisions... ) Point being trim is NOT simulated here worth a toejam. Stop getting all realism comparative, at least in this case and point.
Lemme put it this way.
I have a Saitek Stick and Throttle that finally after 79,800 looks around guarding my bellybutton from Fatty's kill vulches in AH, crapped out a view 8-way hat switch.
I had to borrow a Microsoft Sindwinder this week.. (I call it a turdspirler) Its aweful, and has no trim switches, so in fact I turned on "Combat Trim".
End result was horrid AH control, and I think CT is mainly to blame. I of course WANT the guys trying the LW cannon killers to do well...and they will if they get rid of that awfuk combat trim. It just porkes the best of flight models.
Too bad I have to give out secrets...you get the jist.
Now stop with the whining, and send me $ for making your autopilot switches work so whoopee good.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Wut, you guys actually USE CT?
To me it's a liability, not an asset (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Von Santa
Staffelkapitän 9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"If you return from a mission with a victory, but without your Rottenflieger, you have lost your battle."
- D. Hrabak, JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://stsantas.tripod.com/stsanta.jpg)
-
The real point is most of the people crying for "more realism!" simply have a real selective view of realism.
They don't want it all, just the parts they personally THINK are "real".
For example RAM, this quote:
"it had fixed tabs on aileron and rudder because it was very stable"
tells me you really have no idea why a fixed tab is on a flight control or what it is supposed to do. I'm sure Creamo could tell you and I could too. But you wouldn't believe us. However, if you think your statement is a true cause/effect relationship, you don't understand fixed trim tabs. Poot! Realism just hopped out your window!
Tell me this Ram. You KNOW any of these MG or Cannon rounds will travel much farther than 1.0-1.2. Do you want HT to model their real "accurate" and also "effective" ranges? That would be realism. Do you want that?
Selective Realism.
Creamo,
Ah, I wasn't bashing ya! I rarely use CT because I think I do a better job than it does. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (So much for Auto-dependency, eh?) I will click it on and off if I do some maneuver that very quickly alters my speed, just to get it back close & fast.
I totally agree with you that trim in AH, particularly as modeled with respect to elevator performance, isn't simulated here very well. If IRC, CT was an attempt to fix that and it can be argued either way whether or not it helped.
In fact, trim here has given some folks a total misconception of why trim is even on an airplane. (see above (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) ) As you know and more importantly understand trim is a secondary flight control. There's a lot of people here that don't understand that and what it should mean in a FM.
I DON'T compare AH to realism. I compare it to GAMES and it's a damn good one. I think you and I agree here.
As for that "modern" guy... I'm an old timer. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I preach the "power of the thumb" to my accolytes. A simple twitch of the thumb and George in all his mindless glory is removed from the control loop. I let George do cruises and climbs and descents above 20K, in controlled airspace. The rest I'd rather do myself.
Just flew the redeye in from the coast without A/T. It was brutal! I almost died! It was the end of the world! NOT! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) Saved about 2.0 above planned burn running the throttles myself.
I think you should get Carty to send you the $ you deserve. (..and I agree you don't get enough.) Heard NW did pretty good. You should top those guys easily... G/L!
-
Originally posted by Toad:
tells me you really have no idea why a fixed tab is on a flight control or what it is supposed to do. I'm sure Creamo could tell you and I could too. But you wouldn't believe us. However, if you think your statement is a true cause/effect relationship, you don't understand fixed trim tabs. Poot! Realism just hopped out your window!
fixed trim tab was a fixed surface, set at the field at a determinate angle wich could not be changed during flight. The tab was set following pilot's preferences, so the stick and rudders were "centered" and needed no pilot input at a certain speed. Of course as the speed varied, the aircraft tended to change the attitude, and pilot input was needed to keep the plane flying straight.
Now, Toad, I dont know when was the last time you flew a 190, but let me tell you that in AH with the plane perfectly trimmed for a 150mph IAS speed, if you enter a dive, for the time you reach 400mph IAS in a dive you need LOTS of STICK DEFLECTION to prevent the plane rolling to the right. Over it, the trim is absolutely needed because the stick is not enough to keep the plane in a straight attitude. Not to talk about the BIG trim needed for elevator, elevator wich, BTW should be automatic (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Now tell me that the real life 190s did that,dude. The 190 was a very pilot friendly, extremely STABLE plane at all speeds. Very few pilot workload was needed for the plane to fly,so the pilot could concentrate on fighting. Read any accounts on it.
BTW Flying with the plane severely out of trim is qualified as "pilot workload". Just FYI.
I think that it is you who doesnt know too much here. I, indeed, and as you can read above, DO.
Tell me this Ram. You KNOW any of these MG or Cannon rounds will travel much farther than 1.0-1.2. Do you want HT to model their real "accurate" and also "effective" ranges? That would be realism. Do you want that?
Yes. And if you get rid of the range icon, the better. I bet you a dinner that the medium hitting range "suddenly" drops, and that almost no hits are attained at ranges over 500 yards.
Wanna bet?
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
nope.. tried CT when it first came out..
lasted about 1 sortie..
has been off since.
During that single sortie I kept saying to myself.. "WTF I can't control this POS"
turned it off and whew.. back to 'normal'
-
Toad, you respond intelligent in spades...thank you. That's all the smart, obvious response I trolled for.
R4metz, your using CT that actually inhibits any part of realism HTC employs for new people or as i assume without HOTAS setups, is fitting.
Please dont interject your whining, you cant possibly know tard.
-
CT has its uses in certain planes.. in others its definately a hinderance.
When I flew the Yak-9U I used CT when not dogfighting to keep the plane neutral. With the F6F-5, this does not work at all. Its better to fly without CT in that plane at all times.
AKDejaVu
-
Just flew the redeye in from the coast without A/T. It was brutal! I almost died! It was the end of the world! NOT! Saved about 2.0 above planned burn running the throttles myself.
Why do I get the idea this means Toad is a RL pilot?
FWIW Ram, the anecdotal comments you refer to are comparative in nature- meaning, compared to a 109 the workload is light, perhaps. Compared to contemporary aircraft the 190 is well-harmonized on all axiis, etc. If you are suggesting that one twist of aluminum on the elevator or aileron trim tab will cover it for all speed ranges, thus removing all workload from the pilot, that just can't be so.
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
FWIW Ram, the anecdotal comments you refer to are comparative in nature- meaning, compared to a 109 the workload is light, perhaps. Compared to contemporary aircraft the 190 is well-harmonized on all axiis, etc. If you are suggesting that one twist of aluminum on the elevator or aileron trim tab will cover it for all speed ranges, thus removing all workload from the pilot, that just can't be so.
No no no, kieren ,dont take me wrong. I dont say that the plane could keep a perfect steady course with no pilot input at any speed (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). But fact is that the plane was very stable and the relative changes of attitudes as the speed increased of decreased were relatively minor compared with other planes. And I certainly doubt that a 250mph speed change the plane demand so much stick input as we have to do in AH. That is all.
BTW I'm not talking about german tests, the allied test pilots who tested the plane (for instance, the one I can think now is Eric Brown) after the war said that it was pretty stable and very pilot friendly compared with the allied planes.
Creamo....I dont have a hotas (I wish I had (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)).
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
Since there definetly seems to be two distinct sides here why didn't HT perk an additional plane to make the transition a little more easier??? No sarcasim intended, honest question here.
-
To me it isn't an issue of whether or not the C is perked; it is a matter of what happens next.
Perk 'em all. This is somewhat of an inevitablity anyway, as perking is based at least in part on popularity. There will always be a #1, hence there will always be another plane perked. There are ways that have been forwarded to accomplish this, we'll see what happens.
-
Hey Creamo I sent ya an email on you joystick probs
In case ya see this 1st tho look at this thread http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum10/HTML/000850.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum10/HTML/000850.html)
-
"it had fixed tabs on aileron and rudder because it was very stable"
This is simply incorrect.
Use of fixed aileron or rudder tabs is/was unrelated to aircraft stability. Rather, it was an early, technologically simple attempt to provide a means to relieve stick pressure at one airspeed (or one very narrow range of airspeeds).
The airspeed chosen was almost always normal cruise airspeed. That alone should tell you what trim does.
In-flight adjustable aileron and rudder tabs were a later, slightly more sophisticated means of accomplishing the same effect over varying speed ranges.
Ram, it does not suprise me that different aileron trim is required at 150 vice 400. I'm sure the reverse is true as well. Trimmed for 400, does it then take a lot of aileron deflection at 150?
If you had set a fixed tab for hands off flight at 150 it probably wouldn't be right at 400. I have no idea of knowing how much stick deflection it would take to counter it, but I some how doubt it would be very much. The difference in size between most ailerons and its trim tab is just too great.
Nonetheless and nonethemore, I'm not arguing AH's modeling of trim. It is the way they made it and is an integral part of their FM. We now have to live with it. From information I have be given, CT was an attempt to make trim function more like it actually would in the real world. I have no interest arguing all year over whether or not they were successful.
Keiran, yes, I've been flying professionally for about 27 years now.
-
Originally posted by Toad:
"it had fixed tabs on aileron and rudder because it was very stable"
This is simply incorrect.
Nope. It is true. What is NOT true is that, because having fixed tabs, a plane is automatically to be assumed to have good stability. For instance, the 109 had no rudder tabs until the G10 version, yet it was highly unstable in that axis. Many other planes had fixed tabs, and that does NOT mean they were very stable.
But the 190 WAS stable in all the speed ranges. REad Eric Brown's quotes after he tested the 190A after the war, and read how did the 190A compare with the allied fighters in this regard.
BTW and just as a reminder. I'm not claiming for the AH model to be changed in this regard. I say that if the realistic trim tabs were modelled, then the 190 stability should be modelled aswell. As it is in AH, is no biggie. Right aileron trim and elevator down trim during the dive, and problem solved.
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
Toad-
I knew you were a pilot- I was being sardonic. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Ram-
Let me take a stab at the trim/stability issue. Stability has nothing to do with the trim per se, it is a function of CG, center of lift, thrust line, wing incidence, moments, and all sorts of cool engineering stuff I barely understand. The fixed trim is designed specifically to do what Toad suggested; trim the aircraft for easier flying in the speed range in which the aircraft will most often find itself.
-
No, Ram.
It had fixed trim tabs for exactly the reason Kieran stated.
That's why fixed trim tabs exist.
That's why ANY trim tab exists, fixed or otherwise.
<EDIT> Oh, BTW, when we DO get rid of icons, you realize that the totally unrealistic wide-angle field of view has to go too? We've got to cut it down to what a human can normally see at a glance. This will make aircraft shapes about TWICE as large as they are now and require about TWICE the number of separate views to look around.
So, gun range 2.0+ and airplanes 2X the current size, right? You're going to help campaign for this "full realism"? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
No selective realism, right? All or nothing? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 05-02-2001).]
-
Geez Toad, have you only got one eye? Normal human field of view is between 160 degrees and 180 degrees.
In AH, that 180 degree FOV has to be compressed into a 90 degree FOV due to graphics limitations, which is why aircraft appear to be half their correct size.
As for effective guns range being 2000yds, I've got no problem with that at all. Of course, you couldn't rely on your laser-ranging eyeballs anymore, since NO range data would be supplied. If you can hit someone from 2000yds, you're a great shot and deserve the kill (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
No selective realism, right? All or nothing? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
Ram-
Let me take a stab at the trim/stability issue. Stability has nothing to do with the trim per se, it is a function of CG, center of lift, thrust line, wing incidence, moments, and all sorts of cool engineering stuff I barely understand. The fixed trim is designed specifically to do what Toad suggested; trim the aircraft for easier flying in the speed range in which the aircraft will most often find itself.
ARG! is my english THAT bad?!
Originally posted by R4M
fixed trim tab was a fixed surface, set at the field at a determinate angle wich could not be changed during flight. The tab was set following pilot's preferences, so the stick and rudders were "centered" and needed no pilot input at a certain speed. Of course as the speed varied, the aircraft tended to change the attitude, and pilot input was needed to keep the plane flying straight.
I DO know what the fixed tabs are for. And I INSIST that the 190 was a stable plane,wich does NOT mean that "magically" the plane didnt change attitude during flight.It just means that the change of attitude was LESS, LIGHTER than in other planes of the same time.
I DONT say that the 190 was fitted with fixed tabs because it needed no trimming, I SAY that it was not a big problem, nor a serious drawback as the plane was so stable that the relative pilot workload at speeds out of those for the ones wich the plane was trimmed for at land, was very low.
Really is my english that bad?...or do I express myself so bad? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
Originally posted by Toad:
<EDIT> Oh, BTW, when we DO get rid of icons, you realize that the totally unrealistic wide-angle field of view has to go too? We've got to cut it down to what a human can normally see at a glance. This will make aircraft shapes about TWICE as large as they are now and require about TWICE the number of separate views to look around.
So, gun range 2.0+ and airplanes 2X the current size, right? You're going to help campaign for this "full realism"? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
No selective realism, right? All or nothing? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
REally this is getting under my skin. This is not that you dont understand what I say, this is that you simply didnt read it.
NOW READ BEFORE TALKING PLEASE!
Originally posted by R4M:
And I would like realistic ammo counters too. That is NO ammo counter except on the german planes. And more limited six views than the ones we currently have. And no icon ------->******range******<------- under 1K to make true the need for "Hartmann's solution" unless you are a true marksman (Wich,BTW I'm not).
And:
Originally posted by R4M:
Yes. And if you get rid of the ------->*****range*******<------- icon, the better. I bet you a dinner that the medium hitting range "suddenly" drops, and that almost no hits are attained at ranges over 500 yards.
NOW you get it?
[edit]I'm with jekyll on this one[/edit]
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-03-2001).]
-
i thought the G10 was a ground crew modifacation and not really a produced model
?
-
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaa
-
Originally posted by R4M:
If you ask me, Toad. Yes. I would like the slats on the 109s regardless the assimetrical deployement. .
Lavochkin slats likewise..........
As for the rest? If it doesn't make stuff more complicated I would prefer that the AH AC has no more than the RL AC had.
Tilt
-
RAM appears to be misusing the word "stability", which is confusing.
Eg: "For instance, the 109 had no rudder tabs until the G10 version, yet it was highly unstable in that axis."
To me, that says that the Me 109 was unstable in the yaw axis.
But what RAM probably means is that it had large changes in rudder trim at different speeds.
Here is what Eric Brown had to say about the 190:
A remarkable aspect of this fighter was the lack of re-trimming required for various stages of a flight. There was no aileron trimmer in the cockpit, but if the external adjustable trim tab had been inadvertently moved as a result, for example, of a member of groundscrew pushing against it, an out-of-trim force of considerable proportions could result at high speed...
...The elevators proved to be heavy at all speeds and particularly so above 350mph when they became heavy enough to impose a tactical restriction on the fighter as regards pull-out from low-level dives. This heaviness was accentuated because of the nose down pitch which occured at high speeds when trimmed for slow speeds(in AH this effect is opposite, due to the compromised nature of trim in AH ). The critical speed at which this occurred was around 220mph and could be easily gauged in turns. At lower speeds, the German fighter had a tendency to tighten up the turn and I found it necessary to apply slight forward pressure on the stick, but above the previously-mentioned critical figure, the changeover called for some backward pressure to hold the Focke-Wulf in the turn...
...At the normal cruise of 330mph at 8,000ft, the stability was very good directionally, unstable laterally and neutral longitudinally.
Some penalty is, of course, always invoked by such handling attributes as those possessed by the Fw 190, and in the case of this fighter the penalty was to be found in the fact that it was not at all easy to fly on instruments. Of course, Kurt Tank's aircraft was originally conceived solely as a clear-weather day fighter. It is significant then that all-weather versions were fitted with the Patin PKS 12 autopilot.
BTW; the Fw 190 DOES NOT have any sort of automatic tailplane incidence control. The incidence angle of the tailplane is manually controlled via an electric actuator, which makes changes of trim quick and effortless on the pilots part(like using a TV remote).
-
Exactly, Juzz, and it was something I failed to make clear when I broke down the explanation of trim tabs. That was the particular line that lead me to believe he hadn't quite gotten the point.
-
Don't choke on that hook, Ram.
So, now you are on the BBS as being in favor of ICONS right? Just without range under 1000? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
BTW, since there were no ICONS in RL(tm), having Icons would again be Selective Realism. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Can't have that, now can we? 100% all the way, all the time! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Toad:
So, now you are on the BBS as being in favor of ICONS right? Just without range under 1000? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
That SOMETHING REASONABLE what I would like, yes.
BTW, since there were no ICONS in RL(tm), having Icons would again be Selective Realism.
Can't have that, now can we? 100% all the way, all the time! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
IF you tell me that AH is getting rid of icons in the MA, I would say that is not a good choice, because we have all sorts of plane for each side. You wouldnt know if that 109 is knit or bish, and so you would be shooting down friends and foes alike. For the Main arena the best I can expect is the range information to be quitted under 1K. And that is the reason I so many times have said that I want a HA.
Take a look the thread about the Hostile Shores icon settings suggested for the MA where I say that I even doubt we will see a reduction in the "enemy icon" range. There I say that I would like HS settings for an HA because HTC has said lots of times that the icons are here to stay.
In short, icons are here to stay in the MA, and with a good reason. But for an HA, with limited planesets for each side, I dont see the reason why we should have any sort of icons.
Oh and, toad, once again I forgot you are NOT worth an explanation. You are jumping around takin advantage of anything you can to take a laugh at me. You are not discussing things seriouly but having fun with my difficulties to express my ideas. I wont simply answer you again, unless its to rebate a blatant lie. You are not worth my time.
-
Originally posted by juzz:
RAM appears to be misusing the word "stability", which is confusing.
Eg: "For instance, the 109 had no rudder tabs until the G10 version, yet it was highly unstable in that axis.". In other words, the need of pilot input to keep the plane in a straight-flying attitude was MINIMAL compared with other planes, including allied iron (as is seen in Eric Brown's book). That is what I've tried to explain from the start.
To me, that says that the Me 109 was unstable in the yaw axis.
But what RAM probably means is that it had large changes in rudder trim at different speeds.
Yep! that is what I mean. Take a look at my posts where I talk about " The 190 was a very pilot friendly, extremely STABLE plane at all speeds. "
The 109 needed HUGE left trim input to keep the plane in a straight flight as the plane accelerated. Until the trim tabs were included in G10's rudder, that input had to come from the pilot; requiring lots of work and force to keep the plane centered. So I said that the g10 had bad stability on the rudder as the speeds changed.
By the way, thanks for your Eric Brown's quote. His first paragraph explains my words better than all my posts here...
Now I understand that my english is REALLY THAT bad (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-03-2001).]
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-03-2001).]
-
Selective Realism.
-
Just a question. Is worth the usage of CT? I tested it only once and didnt like the experience at all. Is CT the equivalent to an autotrim for any speed? or an autotrim for any angle while you dont move the stick?
-
CT is basically "sorta close auto-trim for any speed". Meaning it adjust your trim condition as speed changed to something that's "close" based on a chart or something.
What it doesn't do well is deal with very low speeds, very high speeds, or flaps. When I fly the Jug, I use Combat Trim. It's great for cruising around, for BnZ work within a reasonable speed range, and for energy fighting where there are large speed changes happening. That's most of my fighting right there. The beauty of it is, with any manual trim adjustment the CT gets kicked off. So, when I'm in a slow fight, turning with some flap, I add manual trim nose up. When I am diving to 550 MPH, I normally tap the nose-down trim at 450 or so to disengage CT so that as my speed increases the plane will start to natuarally nose up. I'll trim nose up a bit if needed to pull out.
Some guys disable it always. I almost never disable it... although I likely should more of the time. For things like letting go of the stick to type something, it's great, so I use it a lot especially training. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Sean "Lephturn" Conrad - Aces High Chief Trainer
A proud member of the mighty Flying Pigs
http://www.flyingpigs.com
Check out Lephturn's Aerodrome (http://users.andara.com/~sconrad/) for AH articles and training info!
-
Thanks Lephturn, I'll give it a second try.
-
I use combat trim to quickly retrimm the plane for a given speed. Tap combat trim on, tap combat trim off again.
Sort of makes up for that fact that it's hard to manually trim quickly because you can't 'feel' for it. I often manually trim the plane during a dive or just before making my approach to land, just elevator tim though. The one thing I keep forgetting to do is set trim before takeoff after replaning =(
------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>