[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by winny

but you also need the combat reports.

Don't get me wrong..

I think combat reports are great for many things..

Just not great for validating a flight model!

Combat reports say more about the men and their mind set and their tactics..

But very little about the planes performance!

I will say this, you can gleam flying qualities from combat reports.. Stuff like

'I felt a slight buzz in the stick just before the stall while turning with the 109'..

But that description tells you nothing about the stall speed at which this occurred..

As I already pointed out..

Most combat reports don't include enough info to recreate the scenario in the game to see if you get the same results in-game..

Unlike real world data (test reports) that are performed using strict and repeatable methods..

For example..

I can recreate an ROC test in-game using the same real world methods to see if the real world results match the in-game results..

But how do I recreate a scenario to test from a combat report that says..

'In my Spitfire, I dove down on a 109, who spotted me at the last second and tried to evade me before I shot him down'

You cant!

There is not enough information there to recreate the scenario to see if the in-game results match the real world results..

That and the results depend more on the relative pilot experience..

That is to say assume you did try to re-create this scenario in the game..

Put a good pilot in the 109 and a Cherry in the Spitfire and there is a chance the 109 will NOT get shot down..

Does this test prove the 109 flight model is uber and the Spitfire flight model is broken?

NOT AT ALL!

All this proves is the relative experience of the sim pilots involved in the scenario affect the outcome more than the performance of the plane!

Same can be said wrt the orginal combat reports (anecdotical evidence), you don't know how much of 'it' was due to the relative experience of the pilots!

As in was the Spitfire pilot able to turn with the 109 because he was a better pilot?

All in all do we really want our flight models tweaked based on the results of some sim pilot's atempt re-create of a poorly documented WWII event?

I THINK NOT!

But I digress!

Combat reports are also useful to gain in site as to what was actually going in the trenches vs. what the generals thought was going on..

A good case in point is the whole 100 oct usage

Originally Posted by winny

As far as I know combat reports and pilot's recollections are the only record of the use of these aircraft in the role they were designed for, combat.

As noted

Combat reports are great for determining how the pilots used these aircraft and the tactics they used..

Just not good for validating a flight model

Like in the stick buzz example above..

We know it stalled (the event)
We know the pilot felt something in the stick before the stall (the useful flying quality info)
We DON'T know what the stall speed was (what is needed to validate the flight model)
We DON'T know what the throttle setting was (what is needed to validate the flight model)
We DON'T know what the flap setting was (what is needed to validate the flight model)
We DON'T know what the e state was (what is needed to validate the flight model)
We DON'T know what the altitude was (what is needed to validate the flight model)

This list goes on but you should be starting to see my point

TOO MANY UNKNOWNS!

Originally Posted by winny

and eventually if you read enough, you can build a picture of what happened. OK, there's no numbers, but it's foolish to disregard them.

Problem with that method is you can have two people read the same reports and draw two very different pictures of what happened

That is the problem with human nature

Where as with math

1 + 1 = 2

And nobody but raaaid could disagree with that!

Originally Posted by winny

read Gallands stories of diving down onto Spits and being able to engage and disengage at will.

A good example of tactics

But not a good example of how to validate a flight model

All that statement really proves is the plane with a better 'e' state will control the fight, until that pilot does something stupid to give up his 'e' advantage!