Why is the P-38 so underestamated in Aces High

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Guppy35
Basically cause I don't know what the complaint is.  Seems like the AH 38 does what it should, as do the 109s.

And at a certain point it's a bit like arguing with some of our old favorite fanatics.  No matter what is said, it won't matter.

The entire argument seems silly to me.

That's how I see it as well.


ack-ack

[Benny Moore]

My complaint is that all of the real evidence says that, given equal terms, the P-38 should out-turn the Me-109 below 250 M.P.H.  But in the simulator, this is not so.  In fact, it takes quite a difference in pilot skill to make the P-38 out-turn a 109.  Do I do it?  All the time!  But can I do it against a pilot of the same skill?  No.  And the graphs - kindly provided by Widewing and others - prove that in the simulator, the Me-109 is absolutely superior in turning.  And that's wrong.

Once, a good friend and I did an experiment.  We both flew P-38 and set up an equal energy merge.  Performing nothing but flat turns on the deck, neither of us could get on the other's tail after five minutes.  Then we hopped in Me-109s; the result was the same.  But when we tried P-38 and Me-109, the Me-109 always won, regardless of who was flying it.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Benny Moore
My complaint is that all of the real evidence says that, given equal terms, the P-38 should out-turn the Me-109 below 250 M.P.H.  But in the simulator, this is not so.  In fact, it takes quite a difference in pilot skill to make the P-38 out-turn a 109.  Do I do it?  All the time!  But can I do it against a pilot of the same skill?  No.  And the graphs - kindly provided by Widewing and others - prove that in the simulator, the Me-109 is absolutely superior in turning.  And that's wrong.

Once, a good friend and I did an experiment.  We both flew P-38 and set up an equal energy merge.  Performing nothing but flat turns on the deck, neither of us could get on the other's tail after five minutes.  Then we hopped in Me-109s; the result was the same.  But when we tried P-38 and Me-109, the Me-109 always won, regardless of who was flying it.

I haven't found this to be the case when I engage 109s in my 38G.  Unless its a far better stick then I am, I can out turn 109s on the deck with everything hanging out just above the stall well below 250

[Alpo]

This thread is like watching curling on TV.  Not a lot of substance, but I can't seem to turn it off  

Personally, when I'm in a 38, I'm begging the 109 to try and turn

[straffo]

Originally posted by Benny Moore
Given equal terms (roughly equal energy states and pilot skill), yes, no German plane ever outturned or outclimbed the P-38 below perhaps 20,000 feet.  The FW-190 could match the P-38 in performance, however, and was possibly better at vertical maneuvering.

The P-38 turned best at low speeds (below 250 M.P.H.), not high.  Once again you fellows get it wrong.  The Messerschmitt had an initial turn advantage, but once the speeds dropped a bit and sustained turn came into play, the P-38 would catch up.

me163 cannot outclimb the 38 ??

[President]

See Rule #4

[President]

Originally posted by Guppy35
I still can't figure out what the 38 is doing wrong in AH?  I guess I must fly it too much

yeah the 38 seems good in balance
I dont see what the problem is either.

All planes are good models of the real things I think
But I never flown the real things eitehr!!!!!!!

[Soulyss]

I"m not a P-38 expert, I guess I consider myself more of a fan.  I've yet to see anything in this thread to make me believe that it is modelled incorrectly.  No one has posted any definitive evidence that the 38 is incorrectly modelled in AH.  This is the point where I put my trust that HT and Co. have done their homework to the best that it can be done, untill someone finds somthing to the contrary (evidence, data, not conjecture or opinion).  I can or can't "out turn" 109's of all models in the game depending on the pilot in the other plane.  Rarely do I walk away from my smoldering wreckage of a plane after someone gets the better of me (we do remember that no one dies in  here right?) cursing my inferior plane, knowing that despite the fact I am an infallible pilot who does no wrong, but instead is constantly held back by inferior equipment.

[President]

Originally posted by Soulyss
I"m not a P-38 expert, I guess I consider myself more of a fan.  I've yet to see anything in this thread to make me believe that it is modelled incorrectly.  No one has posted any definitive evidence that the 38 is incorrectly modelled in AH.  This is the point where I put my trust that HT and Co. have done their homework to the best that it can be done, untill someone finds somthing to the contrary (evidence, data, not conjecture or opinion).  I can or can't "out turn" 109's of all models in the game depending on the pilot in the other plane.  Rarely do I walk away from my smoldering wreckage of a plane after someone gets the better of me (we do remember that no one dies in  here right?) cursing my inferior plane, knowing that despite the fact I am an infallible pilot who does no wrong, but instead is constantly held back by inferior equipment.

Right on Bro!  

This is their job, and do a lot of research, and they know their SHT for sure.

I trust their modeling too - and glad to be a member.  If it isn't perfect, it is GOOD enough and represents a lot of their research and hard work.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by President
See Rule #4

Wrongway welcome back. Try to keep a civil tounge in your head... So you can stay a while.



Bronk

[Stang]

President = wrongwayrick?

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Benny Moore
Here's something else interesting.



Now, the same source stated that with maneuver flaps, the P-38 turned as well as the P-63.  But that's not all.  Look at the Northrop P-61.  The Black Widow, without flaps, has a better sustained turn than the P-61, P-47, P-38, and F-4U!  The P-61 is roughly the size and weight of a B-25.  Now there you have it - weight does not equal turning ability.

Benny, Navy tests indicate that the F4U-1D should slot in between the F6F-5 and P-51D-15 (but much closer to the F6F-5). In addition, the weight he uses for the P-51D is well below normal operational weight. Removing the under-wing pylons and flying with an empty aux fuel tank doesn't even get the weight as low as the one he plugged into his calculation.

Also, the P-61's wing loading is far below that of the P-38L.

P-38L: 53.4 lb per sq/ft
P-61A: 40.7 lb per sq/ft

This is primary reason why the P-61 turns so well for a large fighter.

Back to the various lift coefficients; From NACA Report #829, which is where Dean plucked the number for the F4U from, is data taken in a wind tunnel for an F4U-1 without a propeller. The lift coefficient without the prop is 1.48. With the propeller turning, the lift coefficient goes up to 2.27, the same as the number he used for the F6F. You can download a copy of report #829 from NASA's report server.

Dean does get one thing right though. The relative minimum turn radius can be compared (by proportion only) by dividing wing loading by the lift coefficient, which is why wing loading is a very important factor.

Flaps increase the lift coefficient. Fowlers also increase wing area (about a 15% effective increase in the P-38). However, other aircraft have flaps too. So, the question is, does the increase in both lift coefficient and decrease in wing loading improve the P-38's turn radius enough to out-turn a Bf 109? I don't think so. It may be very close, but the 109 also has flaps, which will increase its lift coefficient too. I believe that in the real world, just like in the game, the most significant factor can be found in the cockpit.

My regards,

Widewing

[Stang]

Originally posted by President
See Rule #4

More of a mouth than a guy who gets PnG'd?  I think I've had maybe 3 or 4 posts edited by HTC in 4 years of being on the boards.  Nice try though... rick.

[Benny Moore]

Originally posted by Widewing
Benny, Navy tests indicate that the F4U-1D should slot in between the F6F-5 and P-51D-15 (but much closer to the F6F-5). In addition, the weight he uses for the P-51D is well below normal operational weight. Removing the under-wing pylons and flying with an empty aux fuel tank doesn't even get the weight as low as the one he plugged into his calculation.

Thanks for clearing that up.  I'd always wondered why Corsair pilots weren't afraid to dogfight Zekes if the F-4U really turned that poorly.

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Stang
President = wrongwayrick?

Who's Wrongwayrick?


ack-ack