Anti - VVS (Russian/Soviet) Bias ?

[Zigrat]

gotta agree with ripsnort, LW have no reason to whine for quite some time now.

sorry guys, LW now have a plane for every aspect, high alt interceptor, pony chaser downer, fast rolling devil ..  


as for verm's VVS stuff,, verm you cannot whine about the yak-9u, its a awesome plane as it is now. so is teh la5, and we are getting the la7 which like funked said is close (but not nearly as cool looking) to my beloved bearcat.

I am not country-philic or -phobic, i donthave any particular allegiance to a plane's nationality, but i really dont think you have a reason to whine about the state of vvs fighter performance..

if you were to whine about the lack of il2m3 i agree completely, im stil hoping it will be in 1.06  

if you want a fighetr to whine about porked performance, see p47-d30's wep performance, or fw-190 a8.

[Staga]

What is this thing with attacks against someones persona in this UBB?
I've seen lots of those lately and its getting annoying (you maybe noticed that in other topic...).

[Vermillion]

Zigrat, so your saying as long as a aircrafts performances is "pretty good already" or "cool" its ok for it to have its performance crippled? I think 20mph is ALOT. Remember it could be your favorite ride next.

FYI, I have an english translation of Focke Wulf factory test data I will post for you on the 190A8, 190A8 (with GM1) & 190A8/R2 as soon as I get my scanner working again. It shows that the 190A8 in AH is right on the mark.

Fscott, go back and read how both the VVS "prototype" numbers were gathered, and the VVS "production" numbers were gathered. Then read how, when, and where Allied flight testing numbers were gathered and compare the situations to the Soviet Data. You will see that the so called "prototype" data most closely matches the Allied flight testing regime. So what I'm saying is that, if you want to use a consistent method of evaluating flight test data, the Yak-9U should do 372mph at SL and 437mph at 18k. Not the current performance of AH.

Fd-Ski, but at least you have the Tiffe and Spit both with those turbolaser hispano's  

And guys, no one yet has explained to me the logic of not including the Yak-9UT (even at "production" peformance specs), since it would only have needed slight adjustments to the Yak-9U FM.  Why do the Yak-9T which is significantly different in FM (engine, weight, etc.)and graphics, not to mention essentially useless to the current main arena??

And why shouldn't the VVS have its "late war cannon birds" like every other country in AH ??

Thats what I'm whining about.

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

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 02-20-2001).]

[RAM]

   

Originally posted by Zigrat:

sorry guys, LW now have a plane for every aspect, high alt interceptor, pony chaser downer, fast rolling devil ..      

allow me to differ; we lack what was regarded as the best german prop fighter of world war two. Only the British and the Germans planeset have this problem.

USA------->Has the P51D
USSR------>Has Yak9U, has La7
Italy----->Has C205
Japan----->Has N1K2

 

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
3 new LW aircraft this version and *some* LW-commited fliers still whine...un-be-lieve-able.

Edited after reading Staga's post, he's right.

Please in 1.07 put a Bf109E4, a Ju87B and a He111H. Add a F4U4, a SpitXIV, a Spit XVI, a Il10, a B29...As we get three german planes, we will have no reason to rant  

Germany lacks the 190D9 to compete in equal terms with their allied counterparts. Ta152H1 is better than 190D9 only over 30K. wow. And it will (should) be perked. Wow again. Ta152H was a hi-alt interceptor, not a fighter. Here it will be a stratofighter, at the best, because with the bomber gunnery system two mausers and a close range 30mm wont be adequate to get B17s effectively (lancasters yes   ).

And please dont repeat that the 109G10 is a match for the P51. One on one yes, in the arena NO, it isnt.

I will stop it now, mostly because this was not intended to be a thread hijack.

BTW maybe I ranted too strongly. Raged is not the word, in fact I would feel very pissed and annoyed. Not raged (Again I take the word that is not the one to be taken).


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 02-20-2001).]

[Kieren]

Japanese regarded the Ki-84 as their best fighter IIRC...

[RAM]

Well I have always read that the Shiden Kai was the best Japanese plane of WWII.

Of course I also have read the same about the Ki100, so, well...  

[funked]

Yet another Rametz hijack...  Just leave already dude.  

Verm, for US planes at least, HTC seems to be using USAAF data for production planes which were delivered to the USAAF.  

These are not data for Y models which would correspond to Soviet "prototypes".  

Furthermore the USAAF data are invariably more conservative than manufacturer's data.  

If HTC had used Y data or manufacturer's data, I would support you.  But they didn't.  You are out of line here, sorry.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-20-2001).]

[Zigrat]

are you sure we arent getting the yak-ut verm? I agree it should be added, since luftwaffe gets a 30mm variant, so should VVS.

as for the performance numbers, well, lets see.


the yak-9u we currently have produced 1650 horses i think right? like the mustang. and the mustang had the lowest cd,o of the war, but you say yak-9u outruns mustang on deck plus has better wingloading and climbs faster? mabye ill do some moth on the yak-9u.

[Ripsnort]

Luke Rametz?   <G,D,R>

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Luke Rametz?   <G,D,R>

Once again, falling into personal attacks.

Typical.

(BTW once again, I was not Skywlker...poor guy...)

[Ripsnort]

Had a smiley, Mr. I-Am-So-Sensitive...(now THAT WAS a personal attack)

[Zigrat]

math that is

mabye ill take some typing classes too

[Vermillion]

Funked, this is something I thought about over lunch and I will check tonight if I can. Check the date on the flight test data, I would bet that the date occurs before there was widespread production of the aircraft. I didn't say it had to be a Y model. It can just as easily be an early pre-production aircraft used by either the manufacturer or the USAAF for acceptance testing. If I'm right, do you feel that a special aircraft hand tuned by the best factory  engineers and mechanics, or a picked set of airforce personnel,  corresponds to a "production" aircraft ? So do you think that the American data is equivalent to a random untouched and untuned aircraft off the Russian production line?

Zigrat, yes I'm sure it is a Yak-9T, not the -UT. Look at the location of the radiator housing. Its up under the nose, just like the Yak-9D. Not up under the fuselage like the -9U or the P51. Hence, a -9T.  

Also on performance numbers remember that the Yak-9U was MUCH lighter than a P51D. Remember also, that its engines were tuned for performance at a much lower altitude, so I would guess that its engine has less power drawn off to run the supercharger than the P51, thereby increasing performance low, but hurting it up high. So yes, I do expect it to perform better.

RAM, no thread hijacking !!  

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

[funked]

Verm, the Y airplanes WERE the preproduction models used for acceptance testing.

And yes I believe the data that USAAF put in the manuals for each aircraft was intentionally derated to represent what you could actually get in the field, taking into account production variation and service conditions.

Furthermore there is evidence that USAAF and USN aircraft were "hot-rodded" in the field by American boys who grew up working on cars.  Like Robt. Johnson's P-47D which ran 72"(!) boost on a regular basis.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-20-2001).]

[VISCONTI]

"Italy ---> Has C205"

Where??