Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: vorticon on April 19, 2003, 09:30:45 PM

Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 19, 2003, 09:30:45 PM
heres some comparisons of the c205 to the more used la7...the differences dont seem to be very signifigant now do they...here see for yourself and decide

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/c205speed.gif)

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/la7speed.gif)

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/c205climb.gif)

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/la7climb.gif)


conclusion...you decide (but this does conclusivly prove that your wasting your gas if you use WEP on the la7 above 10k alt)
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Regurge on April 19, 2003, 10:00:39 PM
Yep, if you disregard the 50mph/500fpm speed/climb advantage theres hardly any difference at all.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: RightF00T on April 19, 2003, 10:14:58 PM
LOL
Title: Re: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Ike 2K# on April 19, 2003, 10:23:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by vorticon
heres some comparisons of the c205 to the more used la7...the differences dont seem to be very signifigant now do they...here see for yourself and decide

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/c205speed.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/la7speed.gif)

(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/c205climb.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/la7climb.gif)


conclusion...you decide (but this does conclusivly prove that your wasting your gas if you use WEP on the la7 above 10k alt)



Here is a plain and simple conclusion......

Lavochkin La-7 can climb faster, turn harder and go faster than the Macci C.205 ;)
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 20, 2003, 09:32:51 AM
allright im insane...gotta get some new glasses
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: wetrat on April 20, 2003, 12:12:15 PM
You have officially been branded an idiot.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Pongo on April 20, 2003, 12:19:12 PM
Thats alot faster then I would have thought the 205 would climb..
But think what a car looks like going by you at 50mph when your standing still. Thats how much deck speed the La7 has on a 205. And it generates that speed advantage increadably quickly.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Ike 2K# on April 20, 2003, 12:48:17 PM
the P-51D would be a better match-up for Lavochkin La-7
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: J_A_B on April 20, 2003, 01:47:36 PM
And even then the LA7 owns it at low altitudes, being about 12-15 MPH faster than the 51 and having about a 1000 FPM climbrate advantage while having parity or better in maneuverability.

IMO the LA7 sort of resembles a stripped-down hot-rod...it has incredible performance, but that's ALL it has--it has no range, no A2G capacity, somewhat poor weapons, and can only reach that great performance at a somewhat limited altitude range.

That lack of versatility and combat duration is IMO what keeps the LA7 from being "too good", and probably is why it doesn't see more use than it does.

J_A_B
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 20, 2003, 02:35:09 PM
wetrat your about 10 months to late for that...

and actually when i saw those charts and compared them i was suprised at how much better the 205 is than most people think...notice that the la7's top performance is infact less than 25 mph faster than the 205...wich is very suprising...

i chose the la7 because it is basicly one of the best climbers in the game...its speed is nothing to sniff at either sooo by comparing other planes to it we can get a relativly good on paper testing point for other planes speed and climb rate...

and J_A_B the la7 is the 3rd most widely used plane after the spitfire and the p51 (both of wich get a lot of use right of the bat because they are the most recognized planes from ww2)
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Ghosth on April 20, 2003, 04:21:05 PM
Key to the 205 is to approach high, stay high, stay fast.

Any slow la7's or ones with poor SA are not that hard to get.

205 has MUCH better endurance, ammo load, better guns.

So its 50 mph slower on the deck.

I bet at 12k its a tossup, with the d205 able to turn & retain E better at high alts.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: BenDover on April 20, 2003, 04:47:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by wetrat
You have officially been branded an idiot.


We did that last year
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: wetrat on April 20, 2003, 05:39:38 PM
The 205 is just a crappy 109-G2 with even worse visibility...
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: leitwolf on April 20, 2003, 06:02:58 PM
Quote
The 205 is just a crappy 109-G2 with even worse visibility...

The 205 has a lot better handling at higher speeds than a G-2 and also retains E better in Zooms. The 205 is a good E fighter capable of by-the-book BnZ style. The 109G-2 is not. You need to lose E in dives to maintain maneuverability. The 205 also outguns the G-2 (unless you take Gondolas of course), has a better range and generally a lot more pleasant flight characteristic.
In a 1on1, however, i'd take a G-2 because of it's ability to generate E much quicker.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 20, 2003, 06:59:35 PM
dover...your the only person i know off the boards that hates me...i talk to much and fly a dweeb plane dont i...thats what causes it...isnt that right
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: J_A_B on April 20, 2003, 07:34:09 PM
"and J_A_B the la7 is the 3rd most widely used plane "

That's my point.  If it was really as uber as the "perk it" crowd claims, it'd be #1 by a large margin (remember the days of the C-hog?).   It's a good plane, but it has its limitations.  Again, I call it a hot-rod.

The "LA7 problem", if such a problem really exists, can easily be solved without having to perk anything.  Just introduce a terrain with more areas where the deck is at 7-10K.  

I still wish the LA7 had correct fuel duration though.

J_A_B
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 20, 2003, 08:02:50 PM
well that makes sense...and j_a_b stop trying to get _ into the game...they cant be had not because hitechcreations doesnt like them but because PROGRAMS cant handle them
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Creamo on April 20, 2003, 08:55:01 PM
I hate you.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Ike 2K# on April 20, 2003, 08:59:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by vorticon
dover...your the only person i know off the boards that hates me...i talk to much and fly a dweeb plane dont i...thats what causes it...isnt that right


and you need to play more often so that dover and i can shoot at drone targets:D
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: J_A_B on April 20, 2003, 10:40:07 PM
Hey Vort, tell me what AirWarrior's 1980's tech could do that AH's modern tech can't  :)

Not to mention games like Unreal, UT, CS, NFS, AoK, War2/War3, DS, Q2, Q3A, XvT and Homeworld all managed to have _'s available, to name but a few  :)  

It's not a tech problem, considering that the vast majority of games DO allow such characters.  I suppose it could possibly be related to how the AH host works.  

In any case, since we're on the subject, use of special characters in handles would be a GREAT feature for "AH2".


--Now back to your regularly scheduled LA7 thread--

J_A_B
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: TheManx on April 20, 2003, 11:13:38 PM
Quote
well that makes sense...and j_a_b stop trying to get _ into the game...they cant be had not because hitechcreations doesnt like them but because PROGRAMS cant handle them


Hmmm, I can write programs that can display them. It's just a database entry, isn't very tough to add.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: wetrat on April 20, 2003, 11:34:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by leitwolf
The 205 has a lot better handling at higher speeds than a G-2 and also retains E better in Zooms. The 205 is a good E fighter capable of by-the-book BnZ style. The 109G-2 is not.
Heh... I don't bore 'n zoom, so I really couldn't care less how well it does that. The G2 is better.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: BenDover on April 21, 2003, 08:20:26 AM
Don't forget the pound sign (£);)




And its not 'Bore & Zoom', its 'Zoom, Bore, do a 180 & shoot him in the arse when he's not looking'
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 21, 2003, 09:03:51 AM
hmmm...ike i aint even close to a drone...i beleive i managted to shot you down on more than 30 occasions...
Title: Re: Re: c205 compared to la7
Post by: gofaster on April 21, 2003, 09:22:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
Here is a plain and simple conclusion......

Lavochkin La-7 can climb faster, turn harder and go faster than the Macci C.205 ;)


Did someone say GoFaster? :p

I've flown both and actually had more success in the C.205, but that was back when I was a rookie and flying everything just to see what they could do.  I liked the way the C.205 handled overall - good blend of speed and turn - and both planes had horrible bullet ballistics.  The LA-7 was faster, climbed better, and had better visibility, but the C.205 was a perk-building machine!  Of course, that only matters if there are perk planes I want to fly (and there aren't).

The LA-7 is a good interceptor and the better dogfighter, but if you're sweeping an enemy airbase and have support for egress, the C.205 is the plane to have.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: gatt on April 21, 2003, 04:26:28 PM
Vorticon, what are you smokin? ;)

The 205 is (generally speaking) a better fighter than the G-2. During a 1 vs 1, co-E co-Alt fight, the G-2 can be *very* dangerous, tho.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: JB73 on April 21, 2003, 06:32:20 PM
Jab is alright ... but i agree with others about the _ thing ....

if they do allow it i KNOW somone will show up with the name:

F_CKER

or something along that line

Ps. sry to have to use that language visual :(
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: X2Lee on April 21, 2003, 07:00:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by J_A_B
Hey Vort, tell me what AirWarrior's 1980's tech could do that AH's modern tech can't  :)

Not to mention games like Unreal, UT, CS, NFS, AoK, War2/War3, DS, Q2, Q3A, XvT and Homeworld all managed to have _'s available, to name but a few  :)  

It's not a tech problem, considering that the vast majority of games DO allow such characters.  I suppose it could possibly be related to how the AH host works.  

In any case, since we're on the subject, use of special characters in handles would be a GREAT feature for "AH2".


--Now back to your regularly scheduled LA7 thread--

J_A_B


Sorry dood but the underscore are just stupit lookin. Thats why HTC wont permit them. They look stupit.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: J_A_B on April 21, 2003, 09:28:34 PM
JB73, I know where you're comming from, but the funny thing is--Those who wish to make silly, juvenile names can (and do) already figure out ways to do so.  I've played enough different games to know that the morons will be morons regardless of what restrictions you place upon names.

That said, this was supposed to be an LA7 thread so lets try to stay on-topic.  I can always start a new "J_A_B's handle thread"  if y'all like  :)

J_A_B
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Shane on April 21, 2003, 09:36:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by J_A_B
That said, this was supposed to be an LA7 thread so lets try to stay on-topic.  I can always start a new "J_A_B's handle thread"  if y'all like  :)
J_A_B


well considering both the la7 and underscores are over-rated.....

:D
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: J_A_B on April 21, 2003, 10:59:06 PM
Perk points for unique handles....yeah, I could dig it  :)

J_A_B
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Karnak on April 21, 2003, 11:32:01 PM
The only problem I have with the "Add in  high altitude plateaus" solution is that it leaves other low altitude aircraft still screwed.

If you happen to prefer the P-40E, Mosquito Mk VI, La-5FN, P-39 (when it is added) ect, ect you still have to face the full fury of the La-7s.

The high altitude aircraft like the P-51D, Spitfire Mk IX, P-38L and P-47D will all get a good boost though.
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: Griego on April 22, 2003, 12:12:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by J_A_B


That lack of versatility and combat duration is IMO what keeps the LA7 from being "too good", and probably is why it doesn't see more use than it does.

J_A_B



 WHAAAHHAAHAHAAA!:D
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: bj229r on April 22, 2003, 02:56:38 AM
at 5k on wep..LA7 is 50 knots faster...what more is there?
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: SLO on April 22, 2003, 02:57:08 PM
hmm no1 talked about how much better and faster the 205 is in a dive........

boy can that baby dive fast....without stick freeze

if ya a vertical fighter....205 is the plane

its just that the la7 never seems too stall......thats why its UBER

same for niki...retains its speed too long...never stalls
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: RightF00T on April 22, 2003, 03:50:31 PM
La7 never stalls? lol Ive rammed them enough coming down from rope to know that they do.:mad:
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: SLO on April 23, 2003, 08:28:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by RightF00T
La7 never stalls? lol Ive rammed them enough coming down from rope to know that they do.:mad:




learn to fly:p

and stop ramming planes man.....not good;)
Title: c205 compared to la7
Post by: vorticon on April 29, 2003, 03:29:16 PM
thats it ive found good HARD evidence that the c205's climb rate (on wep) is BETTER that the la7's above 7.5k alt according to netaces charts...suckas...

:D