GOOD NEWS FOR NEXT WEEK, and about this week problems

[busc]

- RONNI just told us that the "sector counters"  off is now working  

- I am now working on how limitating altitude with descending winds, i hope it will be done for next Saturday...I think max altitude will be setted at 25k (with strong descendin winds) and a weaker winds at
24-23k to give a good realism and ballance (allies planes were really better at such alts and such alts were actually reached in combat by fighters).
 
HST, as any newborn structure is having some problems...But dont give up, we are learning from our errors...
HST rappresents a different,  more realistic and complex, way to use Aces High...It will take time, but when all the squad will consolidate into organized groups of pilots (thanks to the increasing relyability and ability to coordinate an comunicate of COs,XOs and pilots) they will also start "living" by themselves..

THIS MEANS:
CMs will learn better how to use commands and wich commands can be used (for ex. yesterday i desperately tried to switch off radar counters..just to discover today tht was impossible) COs and XOs will be able to create missions by themselves, pilots will know wher to go and what to do..Walkons will get the "go 112 channel and wait from " everyone when askin "where i go? i want f4u."...all the work will be done quicker better and with more partecipation and fun by pilots and COs....

But this takes many weeks and many emails and many squadrons websites..It is not easy i know...But i trust in this project, because i think that i am not the only one unhappy with the N1k-Chog-Main-arena..And I am not the only one wanting a sim and not a game...wanting a more complex experience, closer to a virtual fightin pilot experience.
BuSc

[RAM]

WTG

[Westy]

 Nice! I forgot about the wind. Very creative!

-Westy

[SFRT - Frenchy]

Oh you mean that now, when my P47's will find Co-alt 109s at 20K, we will run away while 109 will get frustrated and ask why we don't fight?

Lowering max altitude for fighters, is definatly a step backward from realisum. What's next? Allied fighters prohibited from diving away when at less than 6k from a LW plane?

Most people cry for realisum but can't handle it.  

[1776]

I for one am willing to have you all try anything to improve the sim!!  I will wait and see how your judgement unfolds.

<S> ( a big one too) for your ability to withstand all the negs generated so far.

Thanks for hanging in there and improving things.  I hope there are others that appreciate your efforts!!

I had a wonderful time enjoying our B-17 raid and look forward to many more fun filled hours in the future

Once again <S>(BIG TIME)

[Vermillion]

Just a side comment here guys, but 35k fights over Sicily are not realistic either.

If altitude limits are what it takes to get fights down to the altitudes they took place at, then thats what needs to be implemented.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[SFRT - Frenchy]

can't really call that a fight at 35K either Vermillon. Because if you fight at 35K, 2 passes later you down to 20K  

Oh and the heck with it, go ahead, do what you want and have fun. It was a pleasure to have seen you around in this scenario anyway.

[214thCavalier]

Allied pilots view.
Ok if the Dar bars are off thats all thats needed cos if your at 30k you are never gonna spot lower enemies.
I wonder tho how many complaints about alt are from Axis ?
Hey historically your planes were crap at that alt and the allies were better.
So you want lower fights well thats easy no Dar bar then we gotta come down to hunt.
Of course another option is for you to fly where YOU want to fight, if your plane excels at 10k well hell fly at 10k then we gotta come down after you.
You wanna hunt buffs (do they have time to get that high ?) then swap squads to a plane that is better at alt.
You cannot blame the allies for using their planes where they operate best if you persist in trying to climb after them !
Jeez guys use your brains, if your flying at a lower altitude hell yes we HAVE to come down and fight cos we cannot just fly high and let you pound our bases now can we ?
You want us below 15k then fly at 10 and try to sucker us in. Now THAT would be realistic, not some half brained scheme to impose a hard ceiling.
Somehow i dont think the Axis designed and built a plane that excelled at 10 or 15k then said there you go now try and climb to 30k and fight.
You are/were expected to make your operating altitude your territory. Have your bombers fly where your fighters excel then dare us to come in and get our tulips kicked.
Oh yes and wingman tactics Camo can help you with those if anybody struggles with the thought.

Problem solved.

But somehow i expect you all to violently disagree  

[busc]

  I am very happy for this feedback...

About max altitudes:

- first problem is working accurately how realizing that (descending winds would be the best..but I am having some probs setting em..I will prolly need to use crosswinds continuously changing direction)  

- deciding which altitudes should be limited will be a long work too...Personally I would love to be as much historically realistic as possible..


The ideal would be having descending wind that starts existin from 22k and increases about this way:
- 22-24k weak-->8-10kts
- 24-26k medium---> 10-15kts
-26-28k strong--->20 kts
-28-30k very strong-->25kts

PlzNote: all windvelocities are just as i theorized em rite now w/no any actual experimental confirm...so they prolly will change.

As I said...I am having a lil problem...It seems that it is not possible to assign negative raise values to wind...I tried, but systems tell me "lift values: 0-127"..That should mean tht neg. values are still not implemented...But I ve  hope to resolve this, because i ve read a post from HTC staff (in CMs BB) saying that it is possible to use negative lift values...so probably I just need to understand how [--> to any CM/HTCstaff tuned--> if u know how to do tht plz help me].

If I get some help we can do a even better work:
- Anyone have some datas of allied ww2 combat altitudes datas and a scanner? (no memories, flight logs, reports, pilot manuals)
 
The other idea, if negative lift remains impossible for now is this:

- using strong crosswinds continuously changing directions--> this is not as realist and effective as the other one..and requires the CM typing a lot during the scenario...but i already have used it and it works.
                     thanks a lot  ,
                                      BuSc

[Minotaur]

Hmmm....

What does this prove?  If you whine you win? (or at least better odds)?  

The first time I played and the Axis did not win very convincingly and the rules get changed?

Please tell me I did not read this between the lines!

BTW I saw allied Icons out to 9.5k and axis Icons out to 8.6k.

Thanks!  

------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

"Anyway, more golf..."
Humble

[214thCavalier]

Well i realise we cross posted there Busc and you probably never saw my views , but i get the idea this has already been decided upon and i have to wonder how many people who want it changed were allied ?  
Or do the allies thoughts not count ?

[Sunchaser]

If artificial caps are imposed the 346th Bombardment Squadron will have a new CO.

Please advise soonest as I invest about 6 hours prior to the event start and my XO invests as much or more planning and refining the mission and I could use the time for something else.

If these scenarios are going to be adjusted to suit whoever cries the loudest they have no value to me.




------------------
When did they put this thing in here and WTF is it for?

[busc]

just read Cavalear reply (it was posted while i was editing my last one ).

Cavalear I do agree about the fact that allied planes were better at high altitudes and must remain better also here.

But i disagree about one thing: that is realistic flying quietly at 30-32k for any ww2 prop plane.

This from my experience on modern aircrafts:

- Rectilinear flying w/no decrease/increase of alt or speed respects 1 equation, where thrust , drag , lift n  weight are perfectly ballanced
 
- todays Liners and Executive jets fly at such alts..and olso older aircrafts with alternative-engines equipped w/compressors were able to reach and sometimes mantain very high altitudes...question is, why?  

- Was the air?...Mmm, it's true, air is thicker there and this means less drag...but also less lift!...So why climbin there when the aerodynamic output is the same ? (u have to use ur engine thrust less to go forward but more to remain up!)..nope this is not the point...

-The point is: engine!
A jet engine gets a great advantage from high alt flyin..Less fuel consumption...This is cause of the stechiometric percentage (air/fuel) ....The characteristic of an alternative-engine equipped with a compressor is similar, but it is like comparing a 1960 Rover Mini to a 1995 to a 1998 Nissan Micra...They do both the same job...but performance are "slightly" different...

- 1940 prop planes were almost all not equipped with compressor, but things quickly developed during the war...The compressor appeared: a smart invention  that was able to boost up the stechiometric percentual ------> the engine thrust at high altitudes (air is thick up..u compress it..u get a better ossigenated burnin fuel into ur engine...all goes better)

- But i ve read a lot about p47s w/no guns tryin to going 25k ...and...without touchin sticks, and w/wings levelled... entering in auto-rotation  and riskying to get into strange assects---> a no-exit-flat-spin.
I know for sure that p47, 38 and 51 ceilings were 30-5k high...but those were not-armed planes with few fuel and people like Lindberg piloting....So I find hard to accept dogfights involving p47s w/9 machine guns easilly rollingaround their wings with no conseguences at 30K...

BTW i want enuff  technical and historical datas before deciding   BuSc
 

[busc]

To be clear this this has NOT already been decided  
 I will decide to use alt limitations
only if:
1) the great majority of the players agree (we could test em in funframes to see if em are acceptable and provide more fun)

2)i find relyable historical/technical proofs that this would be realistc.
             
                              thanks, Busc

[LLv34_Camouflage]

Personally, I don't want altitude limits to this scenario.  Remove radar completely, drop the enemy icon distances to 3k and that should do the trick.  Yes, some axis pilots have brought their wishes of an alt limit to our attention, but I don't find that a good idea.  The allies can climb to 30k if they wish.  But they won't find us fighting them there.

Yesterday, my five 109s had little trouble with 6 higher P47s and P38s at around 30k.  We stayed lower and didn't let them close. When we finally managed to drag them to 15k, we shot 4 down and 1 ran away. One P47 was seen in a steep dive at 20k earlier, looked like he compressed.  

But at the same time other units were not as lucky. They were overwhelmed by higher enemies and forced on the defensive.  They had little success but generally managed to survive well.  But I guess that is the way the war goes: some units have success, others not so much.  All in all, the axis managed well even though being the "underdog".

I hope there will be no hasty decisions made regarding rules changes or altitude limits.  I suggest we play with the current rules and get the arena settings correct from now on.  With that department in order, we can reassess the situation and see what to do if these kinds of issues arise.

It is not easy to be the Axis CO in this scenario, I tell you, but so far my men have done very well.  We will continue to wipe the floor with the allies, regardless of what the settings will be.  

Best regards,

Axis CO - Camo


------------------
Camouflage
XO, Lentolaivue 34
 www.muodos.fi/LLv34

Brewster into AH!

"The really good pilots use their superior judgement to keep them out of situations
where they might be required to demonstrate their superior skill."