Author Topic: 190A5 vs 190A8  (Read 65555 times)

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #120 on: April 04, 2010, 12:20:12 PM »
i've posted about data mining and board attitudes before, the information is very public why don't you go find it yourself  ...

or i tell you what, i will post a copy of the quote which includes reference to the source document and you promise to quit harassing me about data from now on and for forever ...

otherwise you will just have to trust me.  

Your parents made you take dance class as a child?
Edit:  After seeing kurfurst posting here I trust no luftwhiner.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2010, 12:22:03 PM by Bronk »
See Rule #4

Offline thorsim

  • Parolee
  • Restricted
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
      • The Luftwhiner Lounge
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #121 on: April 04, 2010, 12:25:18 PM »
no i lived with a professional ballet dancer in NYC for several years though, flexibility is an interesting feature in a woman BTW.

you gonna put your "mouth" where your mouth is?  or maybe look for some data yourself for a change, or you are you just going to continue harassing people with something to offer to a conversation while offering nothing yourself ?

Your parents made you take dance class as a child?
Edit:  After seeing kurfurst posting here I trust no luftwhiner.
THOR C.O. II ~JG-27~ Afrika-AH
Axis Co-Op
Quote from: any number of idiots here
blah blah Blah
Quote from: oldman
Good call.  Ignore the people who actually flew the real planes against each other.

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #122 on: April 04, 2010, 12:42:14 PM »
More hyperbole .


Thorism decoder working overtime today.

You make a claim, you back it up. Either with new finds or links to old. Otherwise it's treated as more hyperbole luftwhine. :aok

Gratz on the dancer though, looks like she taught you to dance on the head of a pin. :P
See Rule #4

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11617
      • Trainer's Website
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #123 on: April 04, 2010, 01:47:04 PM »
no i lived with a professional ballet dancer in NYC for several years though, flexibility is an interesting feature in a woman BTW.

you gonna put your "mouth" where your mouth is?  or maybe look for some data yourself for a change, or you are you just going to continue harassing people with something to offer to a conversation while offering nothing yourself ?


I guess I'll have to stop assuming you're 15 years old.

Basically you want your subjective understanding of somebody else's subjective opinion to determine the FW190 FM in AH.
If you put that in your sig you wouldn't have to mention it in every thread about German A/C.

Offline leitwolf

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 656
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #124 on: April 04, 2010, 02:21:46 PM »
The Flugwerk 190 is not a good benchmark for what a wartime 190A8 could have done. Its several hundred kgs lighter and has equal (if not more) available power.
Thorsim, how do you propose that HTC could match what equals to a "correct" behavior of the 190 when you are talking about your subjective feelings. There are quite a few people here who think our 190 does indeed feels "correct" and has good handling qualities. Both are subjective opinions.. who is correct now?
The only alternative is to go by hard data, isn't it?
veni, vidi, vulchi.

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #125 on: April 04, 2010, 02:24:23 PM »
yes but the germans and the soviets both considered the 190 a superior turning aircraft ...
Everything that I've read suggests that the Germans thought that while the Fw 190 was more maneuverable overall, that the Bf 109 had better flat turning performance.

Offline thorsim

  • Parolee
  • Restricted
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
      • The Luftwhiner Lounge
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #126 on: April 04, 2010, 04:05:23 PM »
so as i suspected you are going to continue to contribute nothing and just post incessant demands for data ... sorry, you go do a little just a tiniest bit of research on the 190 and you will see the light about what i am saying.

Thorism decoder working overtime today.

You make a claim, you back it up. Either with new finds or links to old. Otherwise it's treated as more hyperbole luftwhine. :aok

Gratz on the dancer though, looks like she taught you to dance on the head of a pin. :P

well i will have to assume you are 12 since you seem to continue to wish to believe the FMs in the games are made up of anything like a majority of objective confirmed concrete numerical data.  i'm betting that they are not, and so the sources of the data then becomes very important and of course for the most part they are not revealed.  as far as why i have become so expert on German a/c is that for the most part it does not seem to be the allied aircraft not meeting the expectations one has by investigation ...

you will note that no one in what 9 pages now has offered a german test or PO that supports the findings in the allied tests mentioned here or any german data that supports the flight character of the FMs in the games.

that would not be tolerated for an american plane btw, maybe you should put that in your sig..

 "this we will not tolerate" , and then start a list ...

  subjectivity has been addressed previously

I guess I'll have to stop assuming you're 15 years old.

Basically you want your subjective understanding of somebody else's subjective opinion to determine the FW190 FM in AH.
If you put that in your sig you wouldn't have to mention it in every thread about German A/C.

that may or may not be so however people make statements about other warbirds that are likewise very different  than their wartime counterparts.  it will be interesting to see what differences exist between the 190n and white one when it flies and what reasons can be found as to why ...

i suggest they use the same procedure with all the FMs especially in regards to the subjective evaluations.  

preferably they would compile all the available data whatever form that may take, review it amongst a panel of players and experts form every "camp" who both edit the sources for any anomalies and then compile the remaining data into a set of goal numbers that the coders match and then resubmit the FM for review until it meets the panels expectations enough that they are comfortable saying it is a beta FM and then post the data and the what and whys of the process along with the beta to the community for final vetting ...

that is how it should be done IMO ...

good hard data would be nice but that is pretty much unavailable in the detail desired on the vast majority if not all of the FMs/Planes in the set ...  

however what you don't do is take either the best or worst data for any type and use that exclusively for anything  imo.

The Flugwerk 190 is not a good benchmark for what a wartime 190A8 could have done. Its several hundred kgs lighter and has equal (if not more) available power.
Thorsim, how do you propose that HTC could match what equals to a "correct" behavior of the 190 when you are talking about your subjective feelings. There are quite a few people here who think our 190 does indeed feels "correct" and has good handling qualities. Both are subjective opinions.. who is correct now?
The only alternative is to go by hard data, isn't it?

 

well first of all, have you seen all the data?  secondly you are qualifying the turn in a way the germans did not as they were more pragmatic in their flight evaluations than their counterparts, imo.

i.e. they seemed to have measured the process of the turn in actual mock combat instead of separating the parts of a turn, at least in this case.

Everything that I've read suggests that the Germans thought that while the Fw 190 was more maneuverable overall, that the Bf 109 had better flat turning performance.



« Last Edit: April 04, 2010, 04:14:47 PM by thorsim »
THOR C.O. II ~JG-27~ Afrika-AH
Axis Co-Op
Quote from: any number of idiots here
blah blah Blah
Quote from: oldman
Good call.  Ignore the people who actually flew the real planes against each other.

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #127 on: April 04, 2010, 05:35:28 PM »
Sniped for pompous luftwhine




Heard it all before there Crump Jr. 
See Rule #4

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #128 on: April 04, 2010, 05:51:13 PM »
...

Do you argue just for the sake of arguing and think posting wall after wall of text will make you the winner?  You obviously have no data to back up your claims.  If you did you'd have been able to post once and be done with it.

I'm as much an expert on the 190's as you are.  They are fine.  There.  Done.  Expert opinion posted.  No more need to post walls of text.  I win.  And as proof that I win I submit that there will not be a change to the 190's.
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #129 on: April 04, 2010, 05:54:55 PM »
 You obviously have no data to back up your claims.  If you did you'd have been able to post once and be done with it.

Ya think?
See Rule #4

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #130 on: April 04, 2010, 06:58:08 PM »
Heard it all before there Crump Jr.

LOL.

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #131 on: April 04, 2010, 09:30:11 PM »
yes but the germans and the soviets both considered the 190 a superior turning aircraft ...

If they are referring to sustained turning, its aerodynamically impossible.  If they are referring to the ability to change the lift vector, then they're probably correct, but that's a roll rate issue. 
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #132 on: April 04, 2010, 09:32:21 PM »
"Equipped a merlin 66 the Mk IX has about the same HP."

Also the altitude affects this since at low alt the 190 has the edge on power output...

-C+

Comparing the absolute horsepower is worthless.  You must compute power available versus power required to make that comparison worthwhile.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Plazus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2868
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #133 on: April 04, 2010, 10:01:49 PM »
Thorism decoder working overtime today.

You make a claim, you back it up. Either with new finds or links to old. Otherwise it's treated as more hyperbole luftwhine. :aok

Gratz on the dancer though, looks like she taught you to dance on the head of a pin. :P

 :rofl
Plazus
80th FS "Headhunters"

Axis vs Allies

Offline thorsim

  • Parolee
  • Restricted
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
      • The Luftwhiner Lounge
Re: 190A5 vs 190A8
« Reply #134 on: April 05, 2010, 12:42:04 AM »
i think they are comparing using the two together.  since rolling in and of itself, and flying around in circles are not very useful in air combat, of course the germans at least knew that by the early 40s ;)

from what Saurdaukar posted the RAF knew that as well, or at least fighter command ...



If they are referring to sustained turning, its aerodynamically impossible.  If they are referring to the ability to change the lift vector, then they're probably correct, but that's a roll rate issue. 
THOR C.O. II ~JG-27~ Afrika-AH
Axis Co-Op
Quote from: any number of idiots here
blah blah Blah
Quote from: oldman
Good call.  Ignore the people who actually flew the real planes against each other.