For sure! USAAF reports after the war, stated that shorter men, will support higher G's than taller men. So your big man, can't stand high G's as well as a shorty one.
So your big men, were perfect boom and zoomers, while your tiny japs, were excelent dogfighters. That's the kind of conclusions you can achieve with a single approach on those reports.

Telling, the japanes pilots were generally weak, is some kind of rassism. Little bit...

http://25.media.tumblr.com/eee16cae3...b6too2_250.gif

True. Serial high esteem of Americans can really get's annoying after a while, especially when it comes to war.

Gents, please don't paint all of my countrymen with the same broad brush.

We are not all racists.

The Japanese defeat in WW2 had nothing to do with their size, or their race. It had everything to do with their mindset, their poor understanding of how the US, The British Empire, China, and the Netherlands East Indies, would react, and their inability to consolodate their newly gained holdings after the first six months of the war. ( "Victory Disease" as it was called later by the Japanese). And most significantly the inability of Japanese industry to produce the engines of war in the numbers and quality necessary.

The Japanese bet everything on a lightening campaign that would shock the Allies to the bargaining table. They commited all their reserves out of the gate. To be sure at the time their and our perceptions of each other were very racist, and all mostly wrong.

They saw the west as a bunch of fat, lazy shopkeepers who could never be warriors, and we saw the Japanese as short, near sighted, dull witted people that were no threat.

Obviously neither assesment was correct.

I fully agree with you, but I can't agree with anyone that tries to use prejudice to sustain its claims. I won't fall into the trap of putting all USA citizens on the same bag.
And in this case, this conclussions are trying to justify in game planes performance for the n'th time in this forums, based on the same allready put down argument, of physical prowess. I suppose that for some people Captain America was a reality hidden by the FBI and the CIA as a comic... :rolleyes:

Modern day statistical evaluation, average body height, males, taken from some internet site:

Belgium - 180,4 cm
Canada - 180,1 cm
Finland - 176,6 cm
France - 173,1 cm
Germany - 180,2 cm
Italy - 172,2 cm
Japan - 165,6 cm
Netherlands - 180,8 cm
Norway - 179,7 cm
Spain - 170,0 cm
Taiwan - 172,7 cm
USA - 175,5 cm

It's a fact that not all humans are physically the same, and it's a fact that different bodies have different abilities. And it is also possible to quantify the differences statistically, broken down to all sorts of things - to time period, economical conditions, region or even nationality. I don't see anything racist in the statement of fact that on average in the WW2 period the Japanese pilot was smaller and more lightweight than the average US pilot.
And personally I don't see how on average the smaller guy has the strength of the taller guy. Same way I don't see how on average the tall guy has the same resistance to g loads. Unless of course one of the guys is genetically superior but that would be racism.

Neither racism nor political correctness change medicine, physics or facts.

And finally, nothing like that is modelled in game. So I don't really know why you guys are discussing this in the first place.

There is a big difference between pointing out that one group of generally larger people might be exert more strength/control in a given set of circumstances than another group composed of generally smaller people and asserting that the reason is inherent racial superiority. If you pick five Croatians who are over 200cm tall and have them play basketball against five other Croatians who average 175 cm, it is not unreasonable to expect the taller group to be more successful, and it has nothing to do with race. One might think that my being American is causing you to make racial/nationalist assumptions about me.

The Zero, like all of the main Japanese early war fighters was optimized for a certain kind of combat, based on the preferences of the IJN's senior aviators and their technical staffs. That choice required sacrificing certain other capabilities and limiting others in order to obtain the qualities they considered more important. Some of those choices limited the potential top speed and maneuverability at the higher speeds where Western fighter designs were generally superior. It was noted fairly early on that at higher speeds the Zeros didn't have nearly the margin of maneuverability over their opponents that they enjoyed in close-in dogfights where being light and having good climb/acceleration allowed them to make use of their ailerons and elevators at maximum efficiency.

The loss of maneuverability was markedly disproportionate to the increased speeds, and American tests of the recovered 'Aleutian' Zero in the fall/winter of 1942 revealed that the stick became uncomfortably stiff at 200 kts and the faster you were going, the more difficult it became to exert fine control; I merely pointed out that it would be even more difficult for smaller men to handle, and it gets blown into some sort of racial slur.

I think that my original point was that this particular fault is not modeled in the game, but someone latched onto the 'smaller man/people' comment instead of recognizing the main point that the game often ignores some historically significant factors.

cheers

horseback

Stick forces have always been modeled in IL2. All pilots are the same strength in IL2. All. IRL pilots from the same country varied as to strength.

As to national averages and military jobs it is ridiculous to say that those in the jobs are represented by the national average.

Does size matter? And nutrition? Well, we all know for sure that a bunch of ... let´s say tiny south-east Asians, fed on half a bowl of rice per day, could not stand against a modern army of well fed, tall, well trained and perfectly equipped .. ahem .. let´s say Westerners. They wouldn´t stand a chance, wouldn´t they? Except they did.
Just like the (in average) shorter Romans beat the shit out of the (in average) taller Celtic and Germanic warriors. Just like the (in average) short Huns and Mongols did later with the (in average) much taller European knights. And this was when fighting was physical. Tactics, strategy, motivation, numbers, leadership, logistics, technology, resource-management and a lot of other factors are what counts. Physical size never really did.
Size, by the way, is not a very good indicator for strength, toughness and endurance. I, as a European, worked quite some time in south and south-eastern Asia. I was much taller and (that was quite some time ago, when I did work-out regularly) much more beefy than our skinny, short workmen. But hell, they all were much stronger and much tougher than all of us Westerners, because they were used to constant hard labour since childhood (certainly not a healthy way of life and with 40 they looked like 60).
And statistics ... hrmmpf, I don´t reach the 180,2 cm that I should (although I am guilty of blue eyes) but all the male Korean relatives of my wife are taller than me ...

I see how your statements could be percieved as racism, but I don't think they were.
But I fail to see how the averagely bigger, stronger pilot necessarily has an advantage over the smaller one. He MAY have, but if the construction of the cockpit is optimised for the smaller pilot he MAY even be at a disadvantage. We would have to put two or more test candidates into a Zero pit and see what stick force they could exert to be absolutely sure.
And even then I don't see the point - there are many other abilities that I'd like to see in a fighter pilot before considering physical ability, e.g. eyesight, advanced combat maneuvres, team tactics, marksmanship.
Just imagine that the all the rookie Japanese fighter pilots in 1943 would look like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his best days - but still have the same lack of training - would they have done any better?
And then imagine they all had top notch eyesight and 5000h of training - they could have looked like Homer Simpson and still would have had an impact.
A certain level of physical fitness is needed though, a fat astmathic will never be a fine fighter pilot - no matter how keen his eyesight is.

And I'm glad IL2 does not model different countries pilots differently - that would just open a can of very slimy worms.
Could be interesting to randomly have different pilot models - as selectable difficulty option -and the AI would be affected, too.