diving extension/pitch-back

[BlackBerry]

With an inferior aircraft, victory in one-versus-one combat must come
through superior tactics and better technique. Because energy tactics are
so much more complex than angles tactics, they tend to magnify variations
in pilot ability. This is one reason energy tactics are recommended
for this scenario. Another factor is the increased time involved. Besides
prolonging the agony, energy techniques may allow the pilot of the inferior
184 ONE-VERSUS-ONE MANEUVERING, DISSIMILAR AIRCRAFT
fighter to hold the opponent off until he loses interest or is forced to
withdraw for fuel considerations. The high-G descending nose-to-tail turn
is ideal for this purpose. If the opponent is equipped with RQ missiles, this
tactic may allow the pilot of the inferior fighter to hold the bogey just far
enough off the tail to prevent a weapons firing while he unexpectedly
reduces power or uses speedbrakes to slow down and thereby generate
rapid closure with the opponent. Then at the critical moment he can make
a break turn toward the bogey to produce an overshoot. If the bogey pilot
does not recognize this ploy soon enough and immediately quarter roll
away and pull up, the inferior fighter may be able to reverse for a cheap
shot. If the bogey does pull up nearly vertically, the defender may have a
chance to unload and accelerate down and away, generating separation to
prolong the fight, or even causing the bogey pilot to lose sight. When the
bogey is gun equipped, the defender should expect a snapshot prior to the
overshoot and be prepared to defeat it with a sharp, out-of-plane jink.
Climbing extension/pitch-back tactics cannot be expected to work for
the inferior fighter in this scenario, since the opponent has a P s advantage.
The other energy tactics discussed, which are intended to bleed the bogey's
energy with a nose-to-tail turn (or nose-to-nose in the case of a very small
bogey or one equipped with all-aspect missiles), can still be effective
against an inexperienced or a careless opponent.
The following episode, found in Thunderbolt! by the World War II
USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson, is one of the best examples available of the
use of energy tactics (diving extension/pitch-back) to defeat a doublesuperior
opponent. The encounter described is a mock combat engagement over England between Johnson (P-47C) and an unidentified RAF pilot
in a new Spitfire IX. The Spitfire had about a 25 percent better power
loading and nearly a 25 percent lower wing loading. The Thunderbolt's
only performance advantages were faster top speed, greater acceleration in
a dive (because of the P-47's heavier weight and higher density), and better
roll performance. (See the Appendix for a discussion of roll and acceleration
performance.) Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural
fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow
himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension.
We flew together in formation, and then I decided to see just what this
airplane had to its credit.
I opened the throttle full and the Thunderbolt forged ahead. A moment
later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me. He
couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage. I grinned
happily; I'd heard so much about this airplane that I really wanted to show off
the Thunderbolt to her pilot. The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;
suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt
zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back;
the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.
But my advantage was only the zoom—once in steady climb, he had me. I
gaped as smoke poured from the exhausts and the Spitfire shot past me as if
I were standing still. Could that plane climb! He tore upward in a climb I
couldn't match in the Jug. Now it was his turn; the broad elliptical wings
rolled, swung around, and the Spit screamed in, hell-bent on chewing me up.
ONE-VERSUS-ONE MANEUVERING, DISSIMILAR AIRCRAFT 185
This was going to be fun. I knew he could turn inside the heavy Thunderbolt;
if I attempted to hold a tight turn the Spitfire would slip right inside me.
I knew, also, that he could easily outclimb my fighter. I stayed out of those
sucker traps. First rule in this kind of a fight: don't fight the way your
opponent fights best. No sharp turns; don't climb; keep him at your own
level.
We were at 5,000 feet, the Spitfire skidding around hard and coming in on
my tail. No use turning; he'd whip right inside me as if I were a truck loaded
with cement, and snap out in firing position. Well, I had a few tricks, too. The
P-47 was faster, and I threw the ship into a roll. Right here I had him. The Jug
could outroll any plane in the air, bar none. With my speed, roll was my only
advantage, and I made full use of the manner in which the Thunderbolt could
whirl. I kicked the Jug into a wicked left roll, horizon spinning crazily, once,
twice, into a third. As he turned to the left to follow, I tramped down on the
right rudder, banged the stick over to the right. Around and around we went,
left, right, left, right. I could whip through better than two rolls before the
Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.
I just refused to turn. Every time he tried to follow me in a roll, I flashed away
to the opposite side, opening the gap between our two planes.
Then I played the trump. The Spitfire was clawing wildly through the air,
trying to follow me in a roll, when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt
howled and ran for earth. Barely had the Spitfire started to follow—and I was a
long way ahead of him by now—when I jerked back on the stick and threw the
Jug into a zoom climb. In a straight or turning climb, the British ship had the
advantage. But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter
that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. Before the
Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt
hammering around. And that was it—for in the next few moments the
Spitfire flier was amazed to see a less maneuverable, slower-climbing Thunderbolt
rushing straight at him, eight guns pointed ominously at his cockpit.

LOL，for a P47C, could easily dive from spitfireIX, extend s far away,and zoom up out of spitfireIX shooting range, and fight back using enough energy advantage which is built up during high speed zoom period.

Low altitude, 1 vs 1, boom&zoom, easily solve the spitfire@your 6. It sounds impossible for Il2 FM.

[RegRag1977]

Interesting read from "Fighter Combat" by Shaw.

It could indeed be nice to have two ace pilots from our community to fly and record the engagement such as described in your post to show other less skilled pilots how to fight with the Jug (in the IL2 1946 environment and at the same altitudes). I'm sure it would be very instructive.

[BlackBerry]

Interesting read from "Fighter Combat" by Shaw.

It could indeed be nice to have two ace pilots from our community to fly and record the engagement such as described in your post to show other less skilled pilots how to fight with the Jug (in the IL2 1946 environment and at the same altitudes). I'm sure it would be very instructive.

Yes. but I doubt that P47C could beat spitfire IX at low alt in il2.

[Pursuivant]

Yes. but I doubt that P47C could beat spitfire IX at low alt in il2.

Possibly, maybe.

Quick combat in IL2: 1 Ace Spitfire LF IXc vs. 1 Ace P-47D-10, 2000 meters, Normandy map. ~20 trials with AI on for both planes.

P-47D-10/Spitfire wins about 45% of the time, with about 10% double-kills.

But, the only time the P-47 wins is if it takes out the Spitfire in the first head-on pass. If the Spit survives the first pass with its engine running, it wins the fight.

As always, even Ace AI shows a suicidal tendency towards head-on passes against well-armed foes. AI P-47 pilots almost never use the plane's superior roll rate to make barrel rolls - just aileron rolls. Also, they never use the plane's superior speed to extend range to break off the fight or "drag the fight upstairs" where the jug would have the advantage.

That aside, if there were two human opponents facing off, and they were both smart enough to avoid head-on passes, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

But, that might just be realistic. In the historical dogfight described above, Shaw refers to Robert Johnson as "one of the greatest natural fighter pilots" while we don't know how good the Spitfire pilot was.

Also, it was a mock dogfight, so there was no damage. The Spitfire was in a position to take shots which could have ended the fight before Johnson was able to get into firing position.

So, realistically, in a maneuver fight at low altitude, the Spitfire's superior overall maneuverability, climb rate and cannon armament might give it the edge over the jug's slightly better speed, zoom climb and roll rate.

[BlackBerry]

But, that might just be realistic. In the historical dogfight described above, Shaw refers to Robert Johnson as "one of the greatest natural fighter pilots" while we don't know how good the Spitfire pilot was.

1）P47C， not P47D. AI is stupid.
2) when P47C begins to dive, even a rockie pilot of spitfire could push full forward throttle with 3000rpm engine. A ace for spitfire? no help.

3) in Il2, you even can not extend to a safe distance beyond spitfire IX shoot range if both have similar initial energy. Leave alone "Pitch back".

[BlackBerry]

1）P47C， not P47D. AI is stupid.

2) when P47C begins to dive/zoom, even a rockie pilot of spitfire could push full forward throttle with 3000rpm engine. A ace for spitfire? no help.

3) in Il2, you even can not extend to a safe distance beyond spitfire IX shoot range if both have similar initial energy. Leave alone "Pitch back".


But, that might just be realistic. In the historical dogfight described above, Shaw refers to Robert Johnson as "one of the greatest natural fighter pilots" while we don't know how good the Spitfire pilot was.

Also, it was a mock dogfight, so there was no damage. The Spitfire was in a position to take shots which could have ended the fight before Johnson was able to get into firing position.

Johnson said But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. because of the P-47's heavier weight and higher density.

Don't forget spitfire cut short way to pursuit P47C when p47 zooming up.(45 degree? 60 degree?), and couldn't get closer. That's enough.

If I am the P47C pilot caught by a spitfire IX below 5000ft(1500m) alt, the first step is "dive extend" to 800-1000m safe distance, at this time, both are near deck. Then I begin to zoom carefully keeping spitfire IX from entering 500m shooting range. Is that possible? Johnson said spitfire can't get closer. LOL . Finally, when I begin to hammer around, I should be out of spit shoot range, 600m? Furthermore, this is not only 600m distance, but also 600m higher. Only with this energy advantage, could I turn back and point my guns to spitfire. Isn't it? If I get only 200-300m higher, I can barely turn back to spitfire.

When P47C vs SpitIX mock combat(1942late -1943 mid), there was no Tempest. In 1944, allied knew that Tempest could outdive/outzoom P47 slightly/somehow.

BTW, spitfire IX F,HF, even LF could outclimb P47C/D-early at high altitude,ie 8000m high. :) Funny. Of course, P47Dlate P47M/N is another story, P47M =Spitfire XIV @climb high alt.

[IceFire]

Whats your pull up angle? Maybe you're pulling up too sharply and he's cutting the corner. It's a common mistake. I use this in turn fighters all the time... any time someone pulls a dive with a zoom pull up they cut it too tightly and that's where I have them... if they were smarter they would have easily out zoomed me and pulled away.

[BlackBerry]

Whats your pull up angle? Maybe you're pulling up too sharply and he's cutting the corner. It's a common mistake. I use this in turn fighters all the time... any time someone pulls a dive with a zoom pull up they cut it too tightly and that's where I have them... if they were smarter they would have easily out zoomed me and pulled away.

Agree. Dive angle, zoom angle. The most important factor of a"dive extend/pitch back" tactic is ANGLE.

I think 45 degree or so dive/zoom is usually fine, but that depends on initial energy difference/distance etc. Just be careful, if your a/c has the dive/zoom advantage, you will finally hold the energy, that's energy fight.

[IceFire]

Agree. Dive angle, zoom angle. The most important factor of a"dive extend/pitch back" tactic is ANGLE.

I think 45 degree or so dive/zoom is usually fine, but that depends on initial energy difference/distance etc. Just be careful, if your a/c has the dive/zoom advantage, you will finally hold the energy, that's energy fight.

45 degrees? I would say (although I don't actually measure) that mine are more like 30 degrees. A proper zoom to extend fully away and out of gun range before I tighten the zoom slightly before again letting it off as the energy decreases.

Modify your technique.. see if it helps. Maybe it will.

[BlackBerry]

45 degrees? I would say (although I don't actually measure) that mine are more like 30 degrees. A proper zoom to extend fully away and out of gun range before I tighten the zoom slightly before again letting it off as the energy decreases.

Modify your technique.. see if it helps. Maybe it will.

It seems that il2 fm couldn't guarantee you beat a spitfire IX in your P47C, 1 vs 1. Zooming at 30 degree? 45 degree? Neither works.

[RegRag1977]

Possibly, maybe.


But, that might just be realistic. In the historical dogfight described above, Shaw refers to Robert Johnson as "one of the greatest natural fighter pilots" while we don't know how good the Spitfire pilot was.

Also, it was a mock dogfight, so there was no damage. The Spitfire was in a position to take shots which could have ended the fight before Johnson was able to get into firing position.

So, realistically, in a maneuver fight at low altitude, the Spitfire's superior overall maneuverability, climb rate and cannon armament might give it the edge over the jug's slightly better speed, zoom climb and roll rate.

Good points.

However we must take into consideration that Shaw refers to Johnson's book in order to make a "scientific" point: it IS possible for a heavy energy fighter such as the P47 to win against T/B fighter in a dogfight.

Here P47 wins -no question- against Spitfire.

It is not just about pilots different skill levels (ace vs noob), it is about what can be done if an aircraft is flown correctly. Remember that Shaw does NOT care about opinions: he rather tries as engineer and pilot to make scientific statements (read: things that actually work in the real world) about how one can win against a disimilar aircraft. His book is something that must help fighter pilots to survive and win, not something that could lead to death.

Surely Shaw would not make a statement or illustrate a point with an inapropriate example: he knows what he's talking about. I don't see why he would describe a mock combat if it was of any use in an actual combat. My understanding is: during a well executed engagement a properly flown P47 could hold the fight against a properly flown Spitfire.

This is why i find BlackBerry's questionning very interesting and why i wanted to ask for aces pilots around here to do a demo showing how it is possible to hold a fight in a P47 against a Spitfire under 5000 ft ceiling.

[RegRag1977]

Yes. but I doubt that P47C could beat spitfire IX at low alt in il2.

Indeed, but if it can, i want to know how to do it too!

[IceFire]

It seems that il2 fm couldn't guarantee you beat a spitfire IX in your P47C, 1 vs 1. Zooming at 30 degree? 45 degree? Neither works.

I'd have to try it but I rarely jump to blaming the IL-2 FM for my own failings. I know both planes pretty well and I'm not sure.

We don't have a P-47C so we can't test that directly. With any of the P-47D's I know I could easily out dive a Spitfire and put some serious distance between myself and the Spit. The pull up I'm somewhat less certain of. I'd have to read up on the technique involved for sure.

[Pursuivant]

1）P47C， not P47D. AI is stupid.

Sadly, the P-47C isn't in the game, even though it was the pioneering U.S. long-range escort fighter in the ETO. The only razorback jug available is the P-47D-10. You go with what you got.

But, you make a good point. The P-47D had a vastly improved rate of climb, so there's no excuse for it to get consistently out-climbed by the Spitfire in the game, especially when zooming.

AI isn't bad, other than being aggressive about taking head-on shots. Not up to an ace human pilot's skill, but challenging enough for ordinary players. But, it certainly doesn't know how to take advantage of the P-47's strong points.

My point was that the P-47 isn't as hapless in the game as people claim it is, although it certainly isn't going to win a maneuver fight against a Spitfire with its current FM/physics modeling.

[Pursuivant]

This is why i find BlackBerry's questionning very interesting and why i wanted to ask for aces pilots around here to do a demo showing how it is possible to hold a fight in a P47 against a Spitfire under 5000 ft ceiling.

I'd love to see this myself. I'd also love to try to do it myself but I don't fly online and I don't have rudder pedals. There's no way I can take advantage of the P-47's strengths if I can't do a decent barrel roll!

[FC99]

This is why i find BlackBerry's questionning very interesting and why i wanted to ask for aces pilots around here to do a demo showing how it is possible to hold a fight in a P47 against a Spitfire under 5000 ft ceiling.
This is only possible if you have Spitfire pilot who is willing to "cooperate". In other words, if Spitfire pilots knows what he is doing, P-47 can't do anything in a dogfight with Spit, in game and in RL.

And when we are quoting Shaw this is the part that precedes the paragraph quoted by BlackBerry.

Climbing extension/pitch-back tactics cannot be expected to work for
the inferior fighter in this scenario, since the opponent has a Ps advantage.
The other energy tactics discussed, which are intended to bleed the bogey's
energy with a nose-to-tail turn (or nose-to-nose in the case of a very small
bogey or one equipped with all-aspect missiles), can still be effective
against an inexperienced or a careless opponent.
Key part being "inexperienced or a careless opponent".

[Ace1staller]

something new its makes me want to fly a p-47 (:

[RegRag1977]

I see -not surprising, since we are all humans- that everyone can have another interpretation when it comes to quoting a text, i'm just proposing my cheap one that's all:

This is only possible if you have Spitfire pilot who is willing to "cooperate". In other words, if Spitfire pilots knows what he is doing, P-47 can't do anything in a dogfight with Spit, in game and in RL.

And when we are quoting Shaw this is the part that precedes the paragraph quoted by BlackBerry.


Key part being "inexperienced or a careless opponent".

True: "inexperienced or a careless opponent" is a key factor inside the part you quote!

But later when talking specifically about Spitfire IX and Thunderbolt P47C, Shaw doesn't go on with the double inferior argument since P47C is faster (superior top speed) and accelerates faster in a dive, thus neutralizing excess power of the "double superior" aircraft. The Spitfire in the example given is not completely a "double superior" (even with 25% better power loading, 25% lower wing loading advantage the Spitfire does NOT have top speed advantage or dive acceleration advantage) aircraft. Here is the difference with the part you quote, which completely correct in its context.

The part you are quoting precisely refers to: " Excess power OFTEN results in excess speed and a tendency to overrun or overshoot the adversary." Robert L. Shaw, p.183

The key word being "often": that means "not always", just like in the P47c vs Spitfire IX example described later:

"The Thunderbolt only performance advantages were faster top speed, greater acceleration in a dive (because of the P47's heavier weight and higher density), and better roll performance. Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension." idem, p.184

It is not something like cooperating enemy to me...

This is why i still find BlackBerry's questionning valid: i think he has good points actually. But that is just my interpretation.

[RegRag1977]

I'd love to see this myself. I'd also love to try to do it myself but I don't fly online and I don't have rudder pedals. There's no way I can take advantage of the P-47's strengths if I can't do a decent barrel roll!

No problem Pursuivant, i did not ask it to you personally, just to some online guys here!

True for pedals, you would need them no question for such a test.

[FC99]

But later when talking specifically about Spitfire IX and Thunderbolt P47C, Shaw doesn't go on with the double inferior argument
C'mon, he is starting the story with this:
The following episode, found in Thunderbolt! by the World War II
USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson, is one of the best examples available of the
use of energy tactics (diving extension/pitch-back) to defeat a double superior opponent.



since P47C is faster (superior top speed) and accelerates faster in a dive, thus neutralizing excess power of the "double superior" aircraft. The Spitfire in the example given is not completely a "double superior" (even with 25% better power loading, 25% lower wing loading advantage the Spitfire does NOT have top speed advantage or dive acceleration advantage) aircraft. Here is the difference with the part you quote, which completely correct in its context.
P47 is just marginally faster, not enough to have any decisive zoom advantage. Dive advantage is more pronounced but dives are not increasing your E,in most of the cases.


"The Thunderbolt only performance advantages were faster top speed, greater acceleration in a dive (because of the P47's heavier weight and higher density), and better roll performance. Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension." idem, p.184
It is not something like cooperating enemy to me...

Spitfire pilot who burned all of his E in hard turns, allowed marginally faster opponent to build enough separation and speed to zoom above him. Sounds like the novice pilot to me . Whole this fight is actually an example how to lose less E than your opponent.There is a myriad of things Spit pilot could and should do to prevent the described outcome of the fight. As it seems that you have Shaw's book you can find some counter measures to E fight in the same chapter. With an ace Spit pilot that would never happen.

I never fought Spits with P-47 in game but I fought many Spits with FW and what happened in the Johnson's story is absolutely possible to do in game if Spit pilot is not very good. And for all we know Spit pilot from the story could be an ATA ferry pilot pitted against one of the best American pilots.

[Pursuivant]

I never fought Spits with P-47 in game but I fought many Spits with FW and what happened in the Johnson's story is absolutely possible to do in game if Spit pilot is not very good. And for all we know Spit pilot from the story could be an ATA ferry pilot pitted against one of the best American pilots.

That's why I'm inherently skeptical of anecdotal evidence of flight performance. They are typically used to "prove" that a particular plane could do [some amazing feat] when in the hands of God's Own Pilot, ignoring the other factors, such as the quality of the other pilot, the tactical situation, fuel states, mission and overall air superiority.

Much more useful is test pilot reports and performance analysis. Even then, you want a lot of data.

In fairness to the IL2 AI, I did the same auto-pilot P-47D-10 vs. Spitfire Mk IXc test I ran earlier, but with Ace P-47 and Rookie Spitfire. Not surprisingly, it usually plays out exactly as Johnson described it.

Assuming that the Spitfire survives the head-on pass, the engagement generally goes like this: 1) Spitfire burns off too much E in turns trying to follow the P-47's zoom climb or dive in the first pass. 2) Once the spit loses enough E, P-47 uses marginally better top speed and superior dive or zoom climb to extend. 3) P-47 extends, zoom climbs, turns into the opponent, and rolls and climbs as the Spitfire comes in for another head-on pass, getting a ~45 degree deflection shot on the Spitfire's forward quarter. Spit takes mortal damage to its engine or gets shot up badly enough that it loses its speed/ maneuverability advantage. 4) P-47 finishes off the Spit at its leisure.

[RegRag1977]

C'mon, he is starting the story with this:

C'mon, he is starting the story with this:

Quote:
The following episode, found in Thunderbolt! by the World War II
USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson, is one of the best examples available of the
use of energy tactics (diving extension/pitch-back) to defeat a double superior opponent.

Exactly, but please read until the end: how to "use energy tactics (diving extension/pitch back) to DEFEAT a double superior opponenent". Key words are "defeat" and "double superior" opponent. Note he did not say how to defeat a noob pilot, which anyway would be completely pointless. Note also that the purpose of Shaw book is not about collecting impression: it is rather a scientific corpus of methods and techniques.




P47 is just marginally faster, not enough to have any decisive zoom advantage. Dive advantage is more pronounced but dives are not increasing your E,in most of the cases.


Correct when it comes to level flight, but not in a dive : fact presented here is that the Spitfire cannot match the P47 initial dive acceleration let alone top diving speed.
Remember here what Johnson states in the quote:

"But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom".

So apparently it was a known technique to use dive to gain energy advantage with the P47, as Shaw also say :

"Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension".

It seems to me that Shaw understands that it is common to increase energy in a diving extension, at least to the point of having 'energy advantage". But, of course, that is only my interpretation, and you're entitled to yours.

You'll also notice how he states: "German fighter" and not the noob friendly and cooperating fighter. He is talking about actual combat experience, and this shows that the Spitfire pilot may not be as poor skilled as you may want us to believe. Johnson talk with actual combat experience, he would certainly not lose his time telling such a minor feat as beating a noob Spitfire pilot in a mock fight, when he has so many other victories to talk about. He tells us a story with actual combat in mind. Otherwise ask yourself why Shaw would have discuss this -according to you- poor example in his book? Come on...



Spitfire pilot who burned all of his E in hard turns, allowed marginally faster opponent to build enough separation and speed to zoom above him. Sounds like the novice pilot to me . Whole this fight is actually an example how to lose less E than your opponent.There is a myriad of things Spit pilot could and should do to prevent the described outcome of the fight. As it seems that you have Shaw's book you can find some counter measures to E fight in the same chapter. With an ace Spit pilot that would never happen.

Well, please, let's see what happens in the described engagement, phase by phase:

First the Spit dives trying to follow the Thunderbolt diving, then only after being outmaneuvered trying to match the P47 in the zoom (this is the important part of the episode BTW) comes its first (and last) hard turn described as "skidding around hard and coming in on my tail". After that the Spitfire pilots is unable to follow rolls as Johnson "just refused to turn".Then the P47 enters the last dive of the mock combat followed by the fatal zoom climb.

Question to you: where are all the hard-ernergy-killer turns you are talking about? The Spitfire only turns hard once, so definitely not many hard turns here: anyway, if this only hard turn is enough to kill the Spitfire energy potential vs a P47, then there must be quite a performance problem in the game vs reality IMHO. But that's just a question.

As for counter measures, ha! there always a tactic against another tactic!



I never fought Spits with P-47 in game but I fought many Spits with FW and what happened in the Johnson's story is absolutely possible to do in game if Spit pilot is not very good. And for all we know Spit pilot from the story could be an ATA ferry pilot pitted against one of the best American pilots.

Fw190 is quite different from P47 in game and in reality, as you well know.
I also know well that one can shoot down an unexperience or a surprised pilot online, but still i would like to see a track of it (following more or less what Johnson describes in the account and especially the crucial part:

"He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage. I grinned
happily; I'd heard so much about this airplane that I really wanted to show off
the Thunderbolt to her pilot. The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;
suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt
zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back;
the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.
But my advantage was only the zoom—once in steady climb, he had me. "

AND ESPECIALLY

"I gaped as smoke poured from the exhausts and the Spitfire shot past me as if
I were standing still. ").

And as for the ferry pilot, unlike you i don't know for sure, but i really doubt so -for reasons already mentionned in my above remarks. The maneuvers he performed that day were the same he used in actual combat against the Luftwaffe.

[RegRag1977]

That's why I'm inherently skeptical of anecdotal evidence of flight performance. They are typically used to "prove" that a particular plane could do [some amazing feat] when in the hands of God's Own Pilot, ignoring the other factors, such as the quality of the other pilot, the tactical situation, fuel states, mission and overall air superiority.

Intersting Ai test.

I hear you about anecdotes...

However, here the anecdotal evidence is illustrating a general trend which applies to energy fighters, there's nothing like amazing feats here. Shaw's book is about physics and about techniques that work in actual combat: its a method.

("Robert L. Shaw holds a masters degree in aeronautical engineering and is a veteran of fourteen years in U.S. Navy fighter aviation. His assignments have included duty as a carrier-based fighter pilot, an operationnal test pilot, and test director for the Navy's Air Combat Maneuvering Range (ACMR)."

4000 hours in F4 and F14 fighter, the man knows what he's talking about here.

[BlackBerry]

RegRag1977, I agree with you. Shaw's P47C vs SpitfireIX story is to demonstrate combat tactic, the emphasis is "method" not " a rookie spitfire's pilot failure." My interpretation is below, notice that I care about their energy state all along the mock fighting.

Let P47C's energy(including both speed and altitude) is Ep.
Let Spitfire IX energy is Es.

1) At first, P47C and spitfireIX in formation. So, Ep=Es. Neither are full throttle.


We flew together in formation, and then I decided to see just what this airplane had to its credit.



2) then P47C full throttle to a higher speed, sometime later, spitfire followed with full throttle. There is some distance between p47c and spit because p47 speed up earlier, and p47 has a somewhat higher speed due to higher Vmax. Whether the p47c dives slightly or not is not important because spit is chasing p47c at same altitude with a little lower speed.

Now, Ep>Es, only slightly difference. (20-30km/h slower?)

I opened the throttle full and the Thunderbolt forged ahead. A moment later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me. He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage.


3)
The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;

Ep>Es, 30-40km/h difference? what are their TAS now? perhaps 600km/h vs 570 km/h? You know it takes quite sometime to accelerate to Vmax in a level flight with full throttle.

4)

suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back; the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.


Interesting is that Johnson begin to zoom from a medium speed(Below Vmax), and he found spitfire is in struggle to catch him. So we can say p47c outzoom spitfire: even spitfire could cut the conner, spit could not get closer to a zooming p47c.

At this stage, Ep>Es. still slightly advantage.


5) Turning point comes when both speed drops to sth. 300km/h? and below. Zoom period is finished. Continues low speed climb is here. Of course, spit9 outclimb p47c. Finnaly, spit9 fly ahead of and above of p47c and still keeping climb. Certainly, spitfire has opportunity of shooting at p47c at late period of zooming when distant is quite smaller.

Now p47c behind of and lower than spit, and spit begin to turn around in low speed, and try to ride on p47c's 6clock again.

This stage, spitfire pilot might grin happily. spit9 win! spitfireIX has both angle(before overshoot) and energy: Ep<Es. spitfire's somehow higher energy comes from its better climb rate(25 percent better power loading.)

6)
This was going to be fun. I knew he could turn inside the heavy Thunderbolt;if I attempted to hold a tight turn the Spitfire would slip right inside me.I knew, also, that he could easily outclimb my fighter. I stayed out of those sucker traps. First rule in this kind of a fight: don't fight the way youropponent fights best. No sharp turns; don't climb; keep him at your own level.

Johnson is smart, no turn, no low speed climb with a spitfire, otherwise he'll lose.

The most important is that the spitfireIX has both angle and energy! and this is at low altitude, only 5000ft. spitfireIX is ready to get to firing position. This is a typical nightmare for those caught by a spitfire at low alt.

We were at 5,000 feet, the Spitfire skidding around hard and coming in on my tail. No use turning; he'd whip right inside me as if I were a truck loaded with cement, and snap out in firing position.

Ep=Es, approximately.

7) P47c begin to barrel/scissors with better roll rate. But this could NOT establish energy advantage, just make spitfire not get into firing pisition.

Ep=Es, approximately. The distance between them is enlarging due to spitfire's lag in roll maneuver.
. Every time he tried to follow me in a roll, I flashed away to the opposite side, opening the gap between our two planes.


8 )Now big time comes, p47c begin to dive, this is the beginning of dive extend/pitch back tactic.

If spitfire follows, this will be the beginning of spitfire's failure regardless who is the pilot of spitfire. Even you are the best spitfire pilot in the world, if you dare to follow, you lose, your excellent skills could NOT avoid being out-energy by p47c.

Then I played the trump. The Spitfire was clawing wildly through the air,trying to follow me in a roll, when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt howled and ran for earth.

Note that p47c begin to dive with roughly same energy with spitfireIX. Ep=Es.

Distant between them? Don't know. But it should be greater than the time before barrel/scissors.

9) The dive continues, speed higher and higher, p47c dive acceleration advantage show off. Even spitfireIX has same initial energy, p47c will establish energy advantage during dive. Of course, spitfire could not get closer to p47c, on the contrary, p47c is farer and farer away from spitfireIX.When they reach lowest point of the dive and begin level flight. P47c has more speed, same alt with spit.

So, Ep>>Es. and the distance is quite enough for the next maneuver----pitch back.
when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt howled and ran for earth. Barely had the Spitfire started to follow—and I was a long way ahead of him by now


10) P47c begin to zoom. This is the second zoom. The first zoom earlier is from not-so-high speed, and p47c get caught by spit. This time is different because p47c zoom from HIGH SPEED after a dive. Spitfire could NOT get closer to p47c even spit could cut the corner, in such a high speed zoom. High Speed is p47c's "secret weapon".

Spitfire pilot probably wants to repeat the first zoom, catch p47c when both speed drops to low. But BEFORE that, p47c has already established energy advantage, and spitfire could never get close to p47c, leave alone "overshoot" p47c.

Ep>>>Es !

When p47c speed drops to low, at the same time, spitfire IX speed also drops to low. But P47c is quite higher than spitfire, and p47c's altitude is so high that p47c could turn back to spitIX. Amazing. With il2 FB experience we know that p47c should be 500m+ higher than spitfire, otherwise, p47c have no enough space to turn back and spitfire will shoot p47c down.

when I jerked back on the stick and threw the Jug into a zoom climb. In a straight or turning climb, the British ship had theadvantage. But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. Before the Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt hammering around. And that was it—for in the next few moments the Spitfire flier was amazed to see a less maneuverable, slower-climbing Thunderbolt rushing straight at him, eight guns pointed ominously at his cockpit.



Thus we know Shaw's opinion, P47C establish sufficient energy advantage over spitfireIX by "dive extend/pitch back" tactic.

Why? Spitfire is bleeding energy during high speed straight flight---dive and zoom. Spitfire pilot not stupid, he will NOT tight turn while P47c fly straight. Both of them straight fly, but P47c bleeds spitfireIX's energy in straight flight. That's the key. If you are bleeding energy in straight flight, you could do nothing. ACE pilot=rookie pilot during this period. All you should do is to think about how to avoid shot down in the next few minutes by a higher energy opponent.

To reproduce in il2 FB, we need NOT barrel/scissor maneuver, just let p47c fly 400m ahead of spitfireIX, same speed, same altitude,ie 5000ft. Then p47c begin to dive extend (near deck) and pitch back, SpitfireIX FOLLOWS. We'll see how much energy advantage p47c establishes when finish the tactic.

In real combat, if spitfire don't follow, p47c just dive away and go home, that's small case.

[BlackBerry]

In fairness to the IL2 AI, I did the same auto-pilot P-47D-10 vs. Spitfire Mk IXc test I ran earlier, but with Ace P-47 and Rookie Spitfire. Not surprisingly, it usually plays out exactly as Johnson described it.

Assuming that the Spitfire survives the head-on pass, the engagement generally goes like this: 1) Spitfire burns off too much E in turns trying to follow the P-47's zoom climb or dive in the first pass. 2) Once the spit loses enough E, P-47 uses marginally better top speed and superior dive or zoom climb to extend. 3) P-47 extends, zoom climbs, turns into the opponent, and rolls and climbs as the Spitfire comes in for another head-on pass, getting a ~45 degree deflection shot on the Spitfire's forward quarter. Spit takes mortal damage to its engine or gets shot up badly enough that it loses its speed/ maneuverability advantage. 4) P-47 finishes off the Spit at its leisure.

No, your test with AI is not suitable for Johnson's story.

For Johnson, he begin to dive when s spitfireIX on his 6 o'clock, not head to head.

A)Bleeding a tight turning spitfireIX's energy is very easy. An experienced spit pilot will NOT let this happen. He also wanna bleed your energy. :)

B)Bleeding a straight flight spitfireIX's energy is your real task. If you accomplish this, you may beat a Spitfire ACE. This is the purpose of Shaw's text, he is NOT saying how to beat a rookie opponent, he is telling us how to implement your aircraft performance, how to beat a kind of aircraft. Follow his instruction, you will establish energy advantage regardless who is the opponent pilot. ACE or rookie? No difference. You don't need to care about it.

To reproduce in il2 FB, we need NOT barrel/scissor maneuver, just let p47c fly 400m ahead of spitfireIX, same speed, same altitude,ie 5000ft. Then p47c begin to dive extend (near deck) and pitch back, SpitfireIX FOLLOWS. After extend to deck, you begin to zoom, the zoom angle as you wish. We'll see how much energy advantage p47c/d10 establishes when finish the tactic(speed drops to 300km/h). Fly straight during the whole process, don't evade spit's bullet. Good luck.:-P

[FC99]

Exactly, but please read until the end: how to "use energy tactics (diving extension/pitch back) to DEFEAT a double superior opponenent". Key words are "defeat" and "double superior" opponent. Note he did not say how to defeat a noob pilot, which anyway would be completely pointless. Note also that the purpose of Shaw book is not about collecting impression: it is rather a scientific corpus of methods and techniques.
Shaw's book is not intended for kindergarten kids, some comprehension ability and familiarity with BFM,ACM and physics in general are prerequisites for understanding the book. Reading it from the beginning helps too, especially if you read it all, not just a parts you like and conveniently forget everything that doesn't suit your agenda.

Climbing extension/pitch-back tactics cannot be expected to work for
the inferior fighter in this scenario, since the opponent has a Ps advantage.
The other energy tactics discussed, which are intended to bleed the bogey's
energy with a nose-to-tail turn (or nose-to-nose in the case of a very small
bogey or one equipped with all-aspect missiles), can still be effective
against an inexperienced or a careless opponent.
+
The following episode, found in Thunderbolt! by the World War II
USAAF ace Robert S. Johnson, is one of the best examples available of the
use of energy tactics (diving extension/pitch-back) to defeat a doublesuperior
opponent.

You see, some energy tactics can be effective against inexperienced or careless opponent and one of the best examples is in Johnson's book.



Correct when it comes to level flight, but not in a dive : fact presented here is that the Spitfire cannot match the P47 initial dive acceleration let alone top diving speed.
Spits were dived to higher Machs than P47 although this is not relevant for this story.


Remember here what Johnson states in the quote:
"But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom".
And "can't come close to P47" means what exactly, how many meters is that? I'm sure that all of the F1 drivers will sya that HRT is cr@p in comparison to Ferrari but on a full lap difference is whooping couple hundred meters.

So apparently it was a known technique to use dive to gain energy advantage with the P47, as Shaw also say :

"Johnson, undoubtedly one of the greatest natural fighter pilots of all time, used his roll performance defensively to allow himself the chance to build an energy advantage in a diving extension".

It is not guaranteed way of building the E over an opponent, it gives you E advantage only if your opponent is "cooperative" and decide to play your game. Spit can easily dive at shallower angle and keep altitude while holding the P-47 in check. As they started at ~1500m there is not much room for diving anyway.

If you want to build E in WWII environment than climb, climb, climb.

It seems to me that Shaw understands that it is common to increase energy in a diving extension, at least to the point of having 'energy advantage". But, of course, that is only my interpretation, and you're entitled to yours.
Shaw understand air combat and physics principles,it is you who struggles. Basic physics will show you that you will not increase E in high speed dive with prop driven WWII plane under FTH. If you don't trust physics you can check dive tests and calculate E yourself. Shaw know this and he expect his readers to know that too.

You'll also notice how he states: "German fighter" and not the noob friendly and cooperating fighter. He is talking about actual combat experience, and this shows that the Spitfire pilot may not be as poor skilled as you may want us to believe. Johnson talk with actual combat experience, he would certainly not lose his time telling such a minor feat as beating a noob Spitfire pilot in a mock fight, when he has so many other victories to talk about. He tells us a story with actual combat in mind.
This is a story from the guy who scored some kills, survived and wrote this book with M. Caidin IIRC. Book was meant to be sold and entertain not to tell dry facts. He also says that P-47 ca out-roll anything and this nowhere near the truth. It is just about beating famous plane, Spitfire, nothing more nothing less. If you want real controversy than examine the Johnson's story about being hammered by an FW.


Otherwise ask yourself why Shaw would have discuss this -according to you- poor example in his book? Come on...
This is not poor example, this is excellent example how to improve your chances when you are at disadvantage and eventually beat your opponent.



Well, please, let's see what happens in the described engagement, phase by phase:

First the Spit dives trying to follow the Thunderbolt diving, then only after being outmaneuvered trying to match the P47 in the zoom (this is the important part of the episode BTW) comes its first (and last) hard turn described as "skidding around hard and coming in on my tail". After that the Spitfire pilots is unable to follow rolls as Johnson "just refused to turn".Then the P47 enters the last dive of the mock combat followed by the fatal zoom climb.

Question to you: where are all the hard-ernergy-killer turns you are talking about? The Spitfire only turns hard once, so definitely not many hard turns here: anyway, if this only hard turn is enough to kill the Spitfire energy potential vs a P47, then there must be quite a performance problem in the game vs reality IMHO. But that's just a question.


This:
With my speed, roll was my only
advantage, and I made full use of the manner in which the Thunderbolt could
whirl. I kicked the Jug into a wicked left roll, horizon spinning crazily, once,
twice, into a third. As he turned to the left to follow, I tramped down on the
right rudder, banged the stick over to the right. Around and around we went,
left, right, left, right.
P-47 rolls and turns(Johnson never said that he didn't turn, just that he didn't turn hard and rolls without turns makes no sense because in that case plane would just fly straight rolling around longitudinal axis. With doing that P-47 would just lose E.) So mechanic of the fight is this:
P-47 rolls and turn gently
Spit follow the roll and turns inside
P-47 rolls to the other side and turns
Spit can't follow the roll so he is still turning left when P-47 is already turning right. When Spit has rolled and turning right Johnson repeats everything again but to the other side. With every roll and turn Johnson is putting Spit outside of his turn and that force Spit to turn harder every time to get inside of P-47 turn. This creates E difference and separation which enables Johnson to perform vertical move and beat the Spit.

Basic premises of E fight is denying the vertical moves to your opponent, now ask yourself, why Spit didn't pull into vertical and meet P-47 head-on, that would be a draw.
Before the
Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt
hammering around.
Why he/her didn't do it, to slow to pull up or Spit pilot didn't even saw that Johnson pulled up after one of the reversal because it is very likely that after every reversal P-47 went under Spit nose thus making the visual contact impossible?


And this killed his ability to turn inside me.
If Johnson was flying straight Spitfire turning ability is irrelevant, he is faster and has better dive, why he had to roll in the first place?




As for counter measures, ha! there always a tactic against another tactic!

Don't know what is funny here, Spit pilot obviously didn't know how to counter Johnson's moves and that shows his/her lack of skill.



Fw190 is quite different from P47 in game and in reality, as you well know.
I also know well that one can shoot down an unexperience or a surprised pilot online, but still i would like to see a track of it (following more or less what Johnson describes in the account and especially the crucial part:

"He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage. I grinned
happily; I'd heard so much about this airplane that I really wanted to show off
the Thunderbolt to her pilot. The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire;
suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt
zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back;
the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position.
But my advantage was only the zoom—once in steady climb, he had me. "

AND ESPECIALLY

"I gaped as smoke poured from the exhausts and the Spitfire shot past me as if
I were standing still. ").
What is the problem here, P47 will be better in zoom part and Spit will catch it easily in sustained climb.

[RegRag1977]

RegRag1977, I agree with you. Shaw's P47C vs SpitfireIX story is to demonstrate combat tactic, the emphasis is "method" not " a rookie spitfire's pilot failure." My interpretation is below, notice that I care about their energy state all along the mock fighting.

Let P47C's energy(including both speed and altitude) is Ep.
Let Spitfire IX energy is Es.

1) At first, P47C and spitfireIX in formation. So, Ep=Es. Neither are full throttle.




2) then P47C full throttle to a higher speed, sometime later, spitfire followed with full throttle. There is some distance between p47c and spit because p47 speed up earlier, and p47 has a somewhat higher speed due to higher Vmax. Whether the p47c dives slightly or not is not important because spit is chasing p47c at same altitude with a little lower speed.

Now, Ep>Es, only slightly difference. (20-30km/h slower?)




3)


Ep>Es, 30-40km/h difference? what are their TAS now? perhaps 600km/h vs 570 km/h? You know it takes quite sometime to accelerate to Vmax in a level flight with full throttle.

4)



Interesting is that Johnson begin to zoom from a medium speed(Below Vmax), and he found spitfire is in struggle to catch him. So we can say p47c outzoom spitfire: even spitfire could cut the conner, spit could not get closer to a zooming p47c.

At this stage, Ep>Es. still slightly advantage.


5) Turning point comes when both speed drops to sth. 300km/h? and below. Zoom period is finished. Continues low speed climb is here. Of course, spit9 outclimb p47c. Finnaly, spit9 fly ahead of and above of p47c and still keeping climb. Certainly, spitfire has opportunity of shooting at p47c at late period of zooming when distant is quite smaller.

Now p47c behind of and lower than spit, and spit begin to turn around in low speed, and try to ride on p47c's 6clock again.

This stage, spitfire pilot might grin happily. spit9 win! spitfireIX has both angle(before overshoot) and energy: Ep<Es. spitfire's somehow higher energy comes from its better climb rate(25 percent better power loading.)

6)


Johnson is smart, no turn, no low speed climb with a spitfire, otherwise he'll lose.

The most important is that the spitfireIX has both angle and energy! and this is at low altitude, only 5000ft. spitfireIX is ready to get to firing position. This is a typical nightmare for those caught by a spitfire at low alt.



Ep=Es, approximately.

7) P47c begin to barrel/scissors with better roll rate. But this could NOT establish energy advantage, just make spitfire not get into firing pisition.

Ep=Es, approximately. The distance between them is enlarging due to spitfire's lag in roll maneuver.
.


8 )Now big time comes, p47c begin to dive, this is the beginning of dive extend/pitch back tactic.

If spitfire follows, this will be the beginning of spitfire's failure regardless who is the pilot of spitfire. Even you are the best spitfire pilot in the world, if you dare to follow, you lose, your excellent skills could NOT avoid being out-energy by p47c.



Note that p47c begin to dive with roughly same energy with spitfireIX. Ep=Es.

Distant between them? Don't know. But it should be greater than the time before barrel/scissors.

9) The dive continues, speed higher and higher, p47c dive acceleration advantage show off. Even spitfireIX has same initial energy, p47c will establish energy advantage during dive. Of course, spitfire could not get closer to p47c, on the contrary, p47c is farer and farer away from spitfireIX.When they reach lowest point of the dive and begin level flight. P47c has more speed, same alt with spit.

So, Ep>>Es. and the distance is quite enough for the next maneuver----pitch back.



10) P47c begin to zoom. This is the second zoom. The first zoom earlier is from not-so-high speed, and p47c get caught by spit. This time is different because p47c zoom from HIGH SPEED after a dive. Spitfire could NOT get closer to p47c even spit could cut the corner, in such a high speed zoom. High Speed is p47c's "secret weapon".

Spitfire pilot probably wants to repeat the first zoom, catch p47c when both speed drops to low. But BEFORE that, p47c has already established energy advantage, and spitfire could never get close to p47c, leave alone "overshoot" p47c.

Ep>>>Es !

When p47c speed drops to low, at the same time, spitfire IX speed also drops to low. But P47c is quite higher than spitfire, and p47c's altitude is so high that p47c could turn back to spitIX. Amazing. With il2 FB experience we know that p47c should be 500m+ higher than spitfire, otherwise, p47c have no enough space to turn back and spitfire will shoot p47c down.





Thus we know Shaw's opinion, P47C establish sufficient energy advantage over spitfireIX by "dive extend/pitch back" tactic.

Why? Spitfire is bleeding energy during high speed straight flight---dive and zoom. Spitfire pilot not stupid, he will NOT tight turn while P47c fly straight. Both of them straight fly, but P47c bleeds spitfireIX's energy in straight flight. That's the key. If you are bleeding energy in straight flight, you could do nothing. ACE pilot=rookie pilot during this period. All you should do is to think about how to avoid shot down in the next few minutes by a higher energy opponent.

To reproduce in il2 FB, we need NOT barrel/scissor maneuver, just let p47c fly 400m ahead of spitfireIX, same speed, same altitude,ie 5000ft. Then p47c begin to dive extend (near deck) and pitch back, SpitfireIX FOLLOWS. We'll see how much energy advantage p47c establishes when finish the tactic.

In real combat, if spitfire don't follow, p47c just dive away and go home, that's small case.

TY BlackBerry,
Very precise description, we should have begin with this for better understanding of Johnson's account. This will be of great interest especially to people like Fatcat believing that the Spitfire pilot burnt all his energy in hard turns.

[RegRag1977]

Shaw's book is not intended for kindergarten kids, some comprehension ability and familiarity with BFM,ACM and physics in general are prerequisites for understanding the book. Reading it from the beginning helps too, especially if you read it all, not just a parts you like and conveniently forget everything that doesn't suit your agenda.

Yes, absolutely, it's all about physics. Interesting that you're speaking about Kindergarten and yet trying an ad hominem attack on me to make people think that i am wanting to change something in the game when i'm only taking part in a interesting discussion. I guess you don't find this childish. Anyway...

I was looking for more arguments, and no personal attacks...






Spits were dived to higher Machs than P47 although this is not relevant for this story.


We are talking WW2 environement and standard performance, right? So please give me any information that shows that P47C is inferior in top diving speed and has lower dive acceleration compared to Spitfire IX. Strangely Shaw seems on the contrary to believe that the P47 had: "faster top speed and greater dive acceleration"...

Are you trying to make your point against mine by comparing a standard WW2 design with a prototype? Would that be scientific or prove comprehension ability and familiarity with BFM,ACM and physics in general? Or agenda and other Kindergarten stuff?

You're right it is not relevant.


And "can't come close to P47" means what exactly, how many meters is that? I'm sure that all of the F1 drivers will sya that HRT is cr@p in comparison to Ferrari but on a full lap difference is whooping couple hundred meters.


It's just an experienced fighter pilot that tells it, not me. I guess it is just a statement like "no modern allied aircraft engaged in PTO could turn inside a A6M type"...It's a general statement that reflects some pilot experience, i guess.
Frankly, i don't understand your strange comparison with cars, i did not know cars and WW2 aircraft were so close in design that we could compare them, i leave you with that, and instead i ask you to think about what it does mean when successful fighter pilots tell you something like that: "no modern allied aircraft engaged in PTO could turn inside an A6M type", maybe it will help you to understand Johnson statement.


It is not guaranteed way of building the E over an opponent, it gives you E advantage only if your opponent is "cooperative" and decide to play your game. Spit can easily dive at shallower angle and keep altitude while holding the P-47 in check. As they started at ~1500m there is not much room for diving anyway.

If you want to build E in WWII environment than climb, climb, climb.


My point of view is that it is Johnson that was cooperative in the mock fight by letting it start with a Spitfire right on his six, but again that's just me. Denying the enemy to get to your six for free is another basic rule of air combat if memory serves me? Johnson here plays the Spitfire pilot's game by offering the Spitfire pilot the most desirable position to start a dogfight with , and this maybe tells things about how confident Johnson was about his high speed combat knowledge and about the potential of his aircraft...




This is a story from the guy who scored some kills, survived and wrote this book with M. Caidin IIRC. Book was meant to be sold and entertain not to tell dry facts. He also says that P-47 ca out-roll anything and this nowhere near the truth. It is just about beating famous plane, Spitfire, nothing more nothing less. If you want real controversy than examine the Johnson's story about being hammered by an FW.

Strange that an actual fighter pilot with a lot of experience (4000 hours) like Shaw and unlike you, found his account fair enough to use it in his scientific book, praising the man. But now if you yourself want to consider Johnson as a liar and poor poser pilot, that is your choice. As for the Fw190 encounter: i don't see the logical link between being defeated and nearly shot down by a Fw190 pilot and the ability of a fighter pilot to describe a dogfight with precision. Lots of experienced pilots were shot down, what's the problem with that?
haha It seems like that you cannot bear the idea of a famous Spitfire being shot down, and this is childish to me. It appears YOU have an agenda (with the Spitfire), not me.


This is not poor example, this is excellent example how to improve your chances when you are at disadvantage and eventually beat your opponent.


Yes i agree with you on this, but remember that the Spitfire pilot starts the engagement in an ideal position too. The mock fight doesn't start in a neutral position, and this is the most interesting fact in the whole account.


This:

P-47 rolls and turns(Johnson never said that he didn't turn, just that he didn't turn hard and rolls without turns makes no sense because in that case plane would just fly straight rolling around longitudinal axis. With doing that P-47 would just lose E.) So mechanic of the fight is this:
P-47 rolls and turn gently
Spit follow the roll and turns inside
P-47 rolls to the other side and turns
Spit can't follow the roll so he is still turning left when P-47 is already turning right. When Spit has rolled and turning right Johnson repeats everything again but to the other side. With every roll and turn Johnson is putting Spit outside of his turn and that force Spit to turn harder every time to get inside of P-47 turn. This creates E difference and separation which enables Johnson to perform vertical move and beat the Spit.


Basic premises of E fight is denying the vertical moves to your opponent, now ask yourself, why Spit didn't pull into vertical and meet P-47 head-on, that would be a draw.

Why he/her didn't do it, to slow to pull up or Spit pilot didn't even saw that Johnson pulled up after one of the reversal because it is very likely that after every reversal P-47 went under Spit nose thus making the visual contact impossible?


Please read points 7 and 8 in BlackBerry's last post

remark on a small detail: Strange what you say about rolling around longitudinal axis and losing E: I always thought aileron rolling was considered E neutral....Maybe for some reasons it is not so for P47?




If Johnson was flying straight Spitfire turning ability is irrelevant, he is faster and has better dive, why he had to roll in the first place?


That is maybe because he generously gave his six at the beginning of the engagement? What do you think?


Don't know what is funny here, Spit pilot obviously didn't know how to counter Johnson's moves and that shows his/her lack of skill.



What is the problem here, P47 will be better in zoom part and Spit will catch it easily in sustained climb.

Yet Johnson insists on the fact that the Spitfire cannot stay with the P47c in a zoom, and that he could use this to advantage not only versus a Spitfire but also against German opponenents.

[JtD]

What power settings did the Spitfire use while following through the rolls and then the dive? What engine did it have?

[RegRag1977]

What power settings did the Spitfire use while following through the rolls and then the dive? What engine did it have?

That is a very good question and i guess it applies also to the P47. Note that Johnson compares the Spitfire to its German counterparts. So i would guess, roughly similar performance than the German counterparts. But i could be wrong.

[JtD]

Not really a question of what performance did the plane have, but rather of what performance the pilot chose to get out of it. I'd be surprised if he went all out all the time for several reasons, but then I don't see any information about it, and I don't want to get involved in speculation.

However, I would want to warn anyone to draw and insist on general conclusions based on an anecdotal piece of evidence where parts of the most important information are missing. This hardly ever helps to clarify anything, yet often is very misleading.

[RegRag1977]

Not really a question of what performance did the plane have, but rather of what performance the pilot chose to get out of it. I'd be surprised if he went all out all the time for several reasons, but then I don't see any information about it, and I don't want to get involved in speculation.

However, I would want to warn anyone to draw and insist on general conclusions based on an anecdotal piece of evidence where parts of the most important information are missing. This hardly ever helps to clarify anything, yet often is very misleading.

Hi JtD,

I just based my interpretation of performance on details like " I openend the throttle full", "a moment later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me", granted Johnson knows what he's talking about, being a succesful fighter pilot.

But it's clear that we would need more specific information to have a definite word on the subject. My point was just that perhaps the P47 could hold the fight against a Spitfire by using its advantages i.e. dive acceleration and top speed, better zoom climb performance.

And i must insist that i am not discussing a point here in order to change something in the game: that is not my purpose at all.

[BlackBerry]

And i must insist that i am not discussing a point here in order to change something in the game: that is not my purpose at all.

Il2 FB is a 10 years old game. And Cliff of Dover will be better in FM,DM etc. Isn't it? We shouldn't expect too much on an old game...

With regard to P47's pilot, Robert S. Johnson, he is so famous that easy to find his information.

http://acepilots.com/usaaf_rsj.html

1945, Robert was an ACE, but in 1943 April, he was indeed a rookie pilot in P47.

His first combat, first meeting Luftwaffe was may 14th 1943. What a rookie pilot was he at that time!

But on May 14th, he received his baptism of fire, a "ramrod" (bomber escort) over Antwerp, which the Germans usually defended. Three 16-plane squadrons of the 56th went up that day, to help shepherd a force of about thirty B-17s. As they flew over the Dutch coast, heavy flak opened up, ripping into the bombers flying at lower altitude. Hub Zemke, leading the flight, plunged after some bandits, with Johnson and the other two members of the flight "glued to his tail." Eight more German planes came after Zemke's flight, and the four Thunderbolts turned to meet them head on. The antagonists flashed by each other, firing, and Johnson's guns stuck in the 'ON' position despite his repeated flicking of the arming switch. As he hammered on the trigger and switches, trying to shut off his guns, two Focke-Wulfs passed through his bullet stream and were damaged. When Johnson finally got his guns off, he was alone. He had been constantly warned against this exact predicament, a novice pilot alone and at low altitude to boot.

Looking for friendly aircraft, he spotted eight blunt-nosed fighters and sped towards them, in hopes of joining up. His recognition skills needed work, because they were FW-190s. He firewalled the throttle and headed the other way. Keeping maximum speed all the way across the Channel, he gratefully landed, only to have Hub Zemke chew him out for undisciplined flying. It hadn't been Johnson's intention, but this mission began his reputation in the Group as a 'wild flier.'

Before his first combat,he failed in fighter pilot's gunnery test. Poor Robert. LoL

Later that month(May 1943), he and several other pilots who had not completed the fighter pilot's gunnery requirement, went to Goxhill (a miserable place, full of coal dust) for gunnery instruction. They practiced shooting at a towed target sleeve, but he never "got the hang of it," achieving a high score (against the sleeve) of 4.5%, below the requirement of 5%. Thus, the second highest scoring ace of the ETO never actually qualified as a fighter pilot! (And the top ace, Gabreski, had almost washed out of flight training in 1941.)

In April 1943, our rookie Johnson who has ZERO combat experience, beat a new spitfireIX(so probably 18lbs boost, not 15lbs) in a mock combat. The spitfireIX's pilot was a RAF pilot who was sent to The 56th Fighter Group airfield to teach those American(many of them without combat experience in ETO).

The RAF fliers helped orient them to combat in the ETO, and on one memorable day, Johnson out-maneuvered a Spitfire pilot,using the Thunderbolt's superior barrel-roll and diving capabilities to get behind the more agile Spitfire. Shortly, the Group moved over to Kings Cliffe airfield, and flew it first combat missions in mid-April, 1943.

Would RAF send rookie pilots without combat experience to orient Americans in ETO? It's an international joke. Even this joke is true. Robert Johnson was also a rookie pilot at that time. FairPlay.

My interpretation is that, in a 1v1 low altitude dogfight, an experienced RAF pilot flied new 18lbs boost SpifireIX, was beaten by a American rookie pilot in a P47C by the tactic named "dive extension/pitch back" before mid-April 1943 when 56th Fighter Group had never met Luftwaffe.

The Luftwaffe along english channel in April 1943, on the other hand, was elite. For example, JG26 "The Abbeville Boys". :)

But Johnson said" But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. "

Thus we don't need to suspect the level of RAF's pilot. Imaging RAF pilot using only 60% throttle in zoom in that famous mock combat is also amusing.

[BlackBerry]

Similarly, a 9lbs boost Tempest MkV could outdive and outzoom a 18lb spitfire XIV, although both have 2000HP engine.

We know tempest slightly outdive/outzoom P47D, spitfireXIV slightly outdive/outzoom spitfireIX.


*http://www.hawkertempest.se/TacticalTrials.htm

In 1944 trials were made with the new Tempest Mk. V. The Tempest was fully compared with the nearest companion, the Typhoon IB. Tactical comparisons were also made with the Mustang III (P-51B), Spitfire XIV, Bf 109G and Fw 190. This is the report from the Air Fighting Development Unit at the R.A.F. station at Witter.
(Note: JN737, which was used for the tests, was a Tempest Mk. V Series I. version. I.e. without the spring-tab ailerons and the possibility to carry drop-tanks.)
...

...


Maximum Climb
The Tempest is not in the same class as the Spitfire XIV. The Tempest V however, has a considerably better zoom climb, holding a higher speed throughout the manoeuvre. If the climb is prolonged until climbing speed is reached, then, of course the Spitfire XIV will begin to catch and pull ahead.
*
Dive
The Tempest gains on the Spitfire XIV.

Interesting is that, in Raf Fighting Development Unit test in 1944, they found that Tempest hold high speed considerably better in zoom than spitfireXIV, but when speed drops to low to max climb speed, spitfireXIV will begin to catch up and then pull ahead(after sometime).

Very similar to Johnson's text about P47C vs SpitfireIX mock combat.

I estimate that 9lbs TempestMKV will beat a 18lbs SpitfireXIV with dive extension/pitch back tactic when spit is on tempest's 6 o'clock with same initial speed, same initial altitude,ie 1500m. Believe it or not.

Dive and zoom have different periods, a certain aircraft performance will vary at different period.

For example, 1943 Italy, p47 vs fw190g



(C)

(1) 10000 feet to 3000 feet, starting at 250 m.p.h., diving at angle of 65 degree with constant throttle setting. The FW-190 pulled away rapidly at the beginning but the P-47 passed it at 3000 ft with a much greater speed and had a decidedly better angle of pull out.


It is also possible that p47 outdives(better acceleration )spitfire at 400-800km/h speed range, but spitfire outdive or easier holding speed than p47 at 800-1000km/h.

On 5 February 1952, a Spitfire 19 of 81 Squadron based at Kai Tek in Hong Kong reached probably the highest altitude ever achieved by a Spitfire. The pilot, Flight Lieutenant Ted Powles,[123] was on a routine flight to survey outside-air temperature and report on other meteorological conditions at various altitudes in preparation for a proposed new air service through the area. He climbed to 50,000*ft (15,240*m) indicated altitude, with a true altitude of 51,550*ft (15,712*m). The cabin pressure fell below a safe level and, in trying to reduce altitude, he entered an uncontrollable dive which shook the aircraft violently. He eventually regained control somewhere below 3,000*ft (900*m) and landed safely with no discernible damage to his aircraft. Evaluation of the recorded flight data suggested that, in the dive, he achieved a speed of 690*mph (1,110*km/h, Mach*0.96), which would have been the highest speed ever reached by a propeller-driven aircraft, but it has been speculated this figure resulted from inherent instrument errors.[120]
That any operational aircraft off the production line, cannons sprouting from its wings and warts and all, could readily be controlled at this speed when the early jet aircraft such as Meteors, Vampires, P-80s, etc, could not, was certainly extraordinary.
Jeffrey Quill [124]
The critical Mach number of the Spitfire's original elliptical wing was higher than the subsequently-used laminar-flow-section, straight-tapering-planform wing of the follow-on Supermarine Spiteful, Seafang and Attacker, illustrating that Reginald Mitchell's practical engineering approach to the problems of high-speed flight had paid off.[125]


1)climb extension/pitch back : works fine in il2

2)dive extension/pitch back: works bad in il2


Sad news for allied P47,P51 and Tempest. Hope cliff of Dover bring us more accurate allied aircrafts.

Those lighter/small propeller Russian aircrafts should answer for their design style in boom and zoom.