Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Urchin on March 10, 2003, 12:22:24 AM
-
Think again.... ours is positively nuetered compared to IL-2's. Of course, IL-2 is a Russian game, but jesus sweet christ... La-7 out-everythings a 190D9 or 109K4 with ease. Turns about twice as well as it does in AH, outclimbs the K4 no sweat.. I know it is a Russian game and all.... but man oh man.
-
Damn no matter where ya go theres an el gay 7 whine :)
-
ha ah ah hahah ah ahhaha haha
-
That ain't no lie. LA-7 there is a UFO you can tunr roll accelerate and climb with anything. I will say this though the 190's sure are sweet. Not as sweet as the el gay 7 but they can boogie with MW-50.
-
http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Perform.html
-
The AI is a head banger there. Toughest AI I've ever seen in boxed games.. You'd think they have automatic lock-on mechanism in their cockpits..
-
Thats a neat link Fariz- that guy says the La-7 and La-5 had lower wingloading than a Spit IX though, which would mean they would out-turn a Spit IX . I'll have to look in my Spitfire book to see what the stats are in it and if they match up with this fellows website.
Ok, think I figured out the 'discrepency" - The "weight full" category corresponds roughly to the 'max overload' weight of the Spit IX, which is 9500 pounds (I assume this would be with a huge ferry tank or something), but max 'permissible' is 7,500 pounds and normal 'take-off' weight is 7,181.5 pounds. I know it is ~2.2 kg/ lb, so that'd be roughly 3,265 Kg instead of the 4,309 Kg listed for the Spit IXs weight.
Of course, the weight listed for the La-7 might be its max overload weight to, but I don't think it is.
-
Lower for empty plane, but higher for full load.
That is Tilts site, you may ask him for the source of this information.
-
Minimum climb time to 5000m (Nom/WEP) 4.7 / - mins 4.65/ 4.3mins
That's weird. Looks like most post 43 spitfires would easily outclimb it. I guess anything over 3km was past its prime.
I don't have numbers handy but spit 9 LF/HF and 14s would clock 20k ( 6mk+ ) in about 5 minutes or less.
-
lol, sounds like fun
-
First fight I tried in FB was a 3 gun La7 vs a Hog d22 with an average pilot
He beat me easy!
So I was a little more carefull next time and it took me maybe 40 seconds after the merge to get him
Then I noticed that my throttle was set up wrong and was only going to 64%.
-
The fact is the LA-7 WAS better at most things than most planes so it isn't a big deal really... you could argue a tweak here and there but I would think having both Aces and FB giving it the edge would be decent evidence for the common man...
I suck at dogfighting so it wouldn't matter for me anyway... as evidenced by AGJV44 shooting me down last night pretty easily in that Dora while I was in a P-47... Different game... same result...
For that matter I think a P-40 got me while in an LA-7! lol
Now you want to talk Uber... the AAA in FB is even more deadly than Aces... I watched a bomber completely come apart at long range and if you plan on straffing the field you'd better be doing at least 600mph!
-
Pongo,
2 questions.
1. Are you talking about IL2 FB (Forgotten Battles)?
2. Hog-D22? Is the a F4U-1D or a P-47D?
-
Never thought the la7 was that bad here
shamus
-
Hog D-22 must mean P47D22 as there is no F4U in FB at this time. And I seem to recall Republic fighters had a seies of "-hog" nicknames leading right up to the A10 Warthog.
-
GRUNHERZ,
That's what I thought although I was hoping one may have snuck in.
I keep hearing about these next gen simms that are ultra-realistic and i want to invest in one with the F4U. Targetware with Target Korea/Rabaul is supposed to be but I have doubts it will ever reach open beta. Dissapointing really.
-
Hondas right, I got nuked by a hurricane in a la-7 and SA is critical in this game. You can be on the 6 of one guy and next thing u know u are in a chute. If I see La-7's try and get them to go vert with ya and over shoot roll away as it is really hard to see when you are blacked out ;) above 3000 meters that mw-50 lets you pull away from the la's i have found out and you can zoom climb from teh deck doing 750 kph to 2-2500 pretty easily. grab and the la7 wont keep with ya. I am slowly learning how to fight the monsters but the Mig 3 will keep with the la7 in a turn easily. I find that to be the la7 killer in the planeset so far. K4 is lacking in speed, and remember it was just released so give it time to get the fixes out.
-
Yes...
Total brain fart...Jug..P47 D22
-
pls let me know when someone has killed a vet or ace la7 pilot in FB 1vs 1 in anything and pls save/post the track
highest i can kill is an average ai la7 pilot with me in 109g2
Urchin has it right - the ruskies padded their game
-
I hope they never model the P38
-
S!
Russkie rides in IL-2:FB are a bit padded, not much but still an amount that makes a difference in combat. In most cases the speeds and climbs given to the planes match the prototypes flown by the state test flight center. I have some charts from them and translated text.
On another sources there's clear indications that the planes very seldom achieved the promised speeds and climb rates. Usually they lacked 20-40km/h. For example La5FN was test flown at 585km/h, but serial planes delivered to front flew at 546km/h at SL. Mass producing planes does affect quality, even Russian sources indicate this. There has been found a lot of reports that the engines were of poor manufacture, overheated and such, planes were of below spec standard etc.
Of course this applied to Germans as well in the late war when factories were in forests etc. IL-2:FB is a good game, but there's a bit of winner's glorification in their own designs.
-
if you read "soviet fighters" you will see that every single soviet plane was tested as a "prototype" and then... the actual plane never lived up to the performace of the stripped down jobs... not by a long shot.
lazs
-
Easy to kill ace AI. They have a bunch of patterns which can be countered.
Film attached of me in a 109K-4 against Ace Khozedeb La-7.
-
there were only a few hundred of these on the front at the end of the war. While the engine turned out to be one of the best it was not really reliable until after the war.
The same engine was droped into the La-5FN and while it was not as good as the La-7, the Germans definitely noticed a difference. They had to change tactics in dogfights using the FW190A8.
Meanwhile the Spit IX was made in the thousands and had an extremely well developed power plant. The 109k was a beast, but it was produced in quantity as a bomber interceptor not a dog fighter....
-Blogs
Originally posted by honda346
The fact is the LA-7 WAS better at most things than most planes so it isn't a big deal really... you could argue a tweak here and there but I would think having both Aces and FB giving it the edge would be decent evidence for the common man...
I suck at dogfighting so it wouldn't matter for me anyway... as evidenced by AGJV44 shooting me down last night pretty easily in that Dora while I was in a P-47... Different game... same result...
For that matter I think a P-40 got me while in an LA-7! lol
Now you want to talk Uber... the AAA in FB is even more deadly than Aces... I watched a bomber completely come apart at long range and if you plan on straffing the field you'd better be doing at least 600mph!
-
I agree - a lot of these planes were built using a wood rather than aluminum skinn and they had problems with fit and finish in mass production.
-blogs
Originally posted by DB603
S!
Russkie rides in IL-2:FB are a bit padded, not much but still an amount that makes a difference in combat. In most cases the speeds and climbs given to the planes match the prototypes flown by the state test flight center. I have some charts from them and translated text.
On another sources there's clear indications that the planes very seldom achieved the promised speeds and climb rates. Usually they lacked 20-40km/h. For example La5FN was test flown at 585km/h, but serial planes delivered to front flew at 546km/h at SL. Mass producing planes does affect quality, even Russian sources indicate this. There has been found a lot of reports that the engines were of poor manufacture, overheated and such, planes were of below spec standard etc.
Of course this applied to Germans as well in the late war when factories were in forests etc. IL-2:FB is a good game, but there's a bit of winner's glorification in their own designs.
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
Easy to kill ace AI. They have a bunch of patterns which can be countered.
Film attached of me in a 109K-4 against Ace Khozedeb La-7.
very nice nath, thanks for the film
easy for you maybe :)
-
K4 vrs Ace Khozedeb El Gay 7 (http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/Info/acedeath.zip)
Was on full real no ext icons etc....... I forgot I had the minimap on from when I hosted a df room on hyperrlobby.
FYI this was at 3000meters (10k feet)
3 3cm hits, then he runs and bails, no fire ball like Naths.
I fought him three times and as soon as he get wounded he runs and does some annoying arsed stick stirring and then bails.
Anyway, they have same move over and over.
-
Hello,
i think its a bit early to vote about the FB LA7, it need time to learn to use the 'new' tactical gamepossibilitys which occur due to more stable gunplatform and better climbbehaviour of the german planes, specialy at high alt.
In the EAW-beginning also all thought the Spit´s are much über, but later we saw that the relatin wasnt that bad, after we found the right tactics.
For sure the La7 was one of the real über-dogfighters in WW2 at low alt, so who try to turn vs a LA7 shouldnt wonder if it dont work.
In reality most planes got shot down by suprise, specialy at the end of the war when the planes got to fast for a close dogfight, so the tight turns are nothing worth if the oponent use realistic tactics (which for sure only work without icons and padlock).
But if its like in IL2, where the 109´s and 190´s had a acceleration like a dead cow, and a e-bleed like a landing spaceshuttle with break-parachute, AH will hold its advantage in a more realistic FM.
Only my 2 cents
Greetings, Knegel
-
Hello again,
Urchin, i did calculate a wingload of 37,65lbs/sqft
The SpitIXc is reated with 3,17lbs/sqft
Did i make a Mistake??
Values of the La7 i have from this page:
http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Perform.html
Wing area: 17,6m² = 4,195m x 4,195m = 13,76ft x 13,76ft = 189m35sqft.
Loaded Weight: 3240kg = 7128lbs (2,2kg/lbs)
Wingload : 7128lbs : 189m35sqft = 37,64lbs/sqft
Most sources for the Spitfire IXc give 31lbs/sqft Wingload, so i guess the Spit should turn better.
Btw, the 109G6/K4 is rated with 41lb/sqft, the 190A8 with 48lb/sqft, Me262 60lb/sqft, Me110Ca 36lb/sqft, P38J 53lb/sqft, P47D 49lb/sqft, P51D 43lb/sqft all values shal be full loaded plane with default weaponsettings.
All this values cant be exact for all versions and fuelloads!!
This values show that the different of the E-bleed while turning between 109G/K and LA5/7 shouldnt be that big like we know it vs the SpitIXc.
Greetings, Knegel
-
On the question of FB flight model vs. IL2 I'd say it is much better overall. Funny thing is I think it has actually pulled closer to the Aces model now than before.
One thing I always have to keep in mind though is the joystick setup. You actually feel like you are changing the flight model in each game with joystick setting changes (speed and e-bleed of course but turning, etc.)... hard going back and forth...
Since this seems to be turning into the FB review thread (maybe not the right board for it of course) couple other thoughts on the positive side:
Sound - If you aren't having problems (like some have reported) it's very good. Going by another plane has really cools effects.
Damage - As if it could get any better, it did. I've had wing deflections from other planes, specific parts sliced off, you name it.
trackIR integrated support - if you haven't tried the trackIR head tracking unit before (especially with the enhanced integrated support FB has) you haven't had true immersion yet. It's the best advancement in computer simulation hardware I've seen since the joystick. No joke. I'm pretty sure they are talking to HiTech about the integration into Aces High 2 but I've also posted the request in the Aces High 2 forum. You really can't go back to HATs and buttons after using it.
-
Yea, I did some pencil and paper work a few months ago, ~31 lbs/sq ft is spot on for the Spit IX, believe the 109E4 was ~33, F4 was 35-36, G10 was 40-41ish. I do remember the 190A8 was 48, think the D9 was in the same area. The 109K4 would be essentially identical to the G-10 we have, so I'd expect the K-4s wingloading to be in the low 40's, maybe high 30's, I'll have to go back and look in my books.
I will say that I have absolutely no idea how wingloading corresponds to turn radius and/or rate, other than that I know lower is better. I don't know that the difference between the La-7 with a wingloading of 37-ish lbs/sq ft and the 109K (or G10) with wingloading of 40-ish lbs/sq foot would be as obscene as it is in IL-2.
In Aces High the two turn relatively close, the La-7 will take about 1 circle in 7 or 8 (Been a while since I did a straight flat turn comparison). In IL-2 I had one rack around on my 6 after 2.. I started on his. These were nose to tail turns, so it isn't like I flew out in front of him or anything, the guy just really really out-turned me.
-
Urchin are you talking about an AI turning like that? It's pretty well know that the AI doesn't use the same envelope ours do and they go outside the flight model params... cheat...
-
No, I'm talking about another player, not AI.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
I will say that I have absolutely no idea how wingloading corresponds to turn radius and/or rate
For same engine power and drag, for example, same airframe, wing loading will affect directly how fast you will spend your E in a turn as well as the stall speed. As an example, compare 109G10 100% fuel vs 109G10 50% fuel. But La7 has different engine and drag than G10, so the difference in turn capabilities will not be based only on the wing loading difference.
-
Hello,
the wingload is the relative weight of a plane to the Air, so a plane with less wingload seems to be more light, this is more important as higher the AOA get while a turn, cause as higher the AoA, as less count the airfoil. Some Jets for example fly without a lowspeed airfoil, only with AoA, so only the wingload count while turning (at 1mach + its a different).
We could nearly forget the engine and the aerodynamic related drag if we know that both planes have similar Vmax.
Only if one plane have a terrible aerodynamic and reach the Vmax due to a extreme strong engine we need to take this in account, cause at low speed the aerodynamic dont count that much, so this plane would have a relative good low speed behaviour while turning.
Another important point is the weight/inertia, but La7 and 109G are similar. Much Inertia in combination with a good aerodynamic but less power in relation to the weight, make a good B&Z plane, most US planes was like that, specialy the P51. The P51 have a similar wingload like the Me109G, can turn with it as long as it have E (altitude).
Greetings, Knegel
-
On the question of FB flight model vs. IL2 I'd say it is much better overall. Funny thing is I think it has actually pulled closer to the Aces model now than before.
I agree very much on this.
After the revision of FM and DM in FB, man, it feels almost like Aces High. I don't think those proud bunch at 1C would deliberatley "neuter" a FM for 'economic' purposes. That being said, the old IL-2 FM sucked. Though it was pretty fun to manage planes in that quirky environment.. as we all know "hard" don't necessarily mean "more real".
...
Now, you can actually feel black outs as a factor of combat. Planes fly smooth and fast... and hell yeah, I can do tricks I used to do in AH in FB, too!