Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Sage29
People are quick to discredit Vets on the history channel..but guess what...they were there, they experienced it..so they have way more credit than most. The History Channel just exaggerates the Vet's account
I fly P-51 all the time, as well as P-47 and get kills all the time without the spray and pray. You need to be confident and smooth in a P-51..most that talk bad about it would get killed fairly quickly in it lol, it's not for rookies
The History Channel is exaggerating an overly-aggressive snap-roll at 10:40. Listening to the Vet, he tried to snap-roll ( like what he did earlier in the video ) and stalled too much ( thats why he fell 2,000feet) and ruddered out safely
Your right, History Channel exaggerates. Snap-Stalling is not a desperate measure though. It's a smart maneuver especially when the enemy plane is more maneuverable and turning is out of the question.
When your flying fast in a P-51 and you snap-roll, you'll stall a little, but you still have a bit of control of the plane, you just rudder the other way and come out of the stall...now the bandit is out in front or about to overshoot. You have to be gentle with it though cause you could lose control and stall out all the way
Also I've had enemy bandit planes explode from .50 cal fire in game. Rare but possible. You pretty much have to be a marksmen with the .50cals in game. American planes are way different from Soviet/German/and Japanese planes in game..it's harder and thats for sure
|
Vets are great resources for just about everything ... but we have to discount and be skeptical in appropriate places. One's recollection of events tends to be skewed without consciously realizing it. Detectives interviewing witnesses of crimes have to be very careful with witness testimony because even when they "were there", peoples memories are notoriously unreliable. Stress and adrenaline and all of that stuff interfere heavily... its amazing what we make up to make the whole situation make sense.
It still doesn't mean that we should discount or discredit witness testimony altogether but it should be taken in context in my opinion.
I'm sure what happened in the end is what happened... no question from me there, but the extent to which it happened is suspect. I, like others have already said, suspect that he snap stalled it and when he recovered was lucky enough to be in a quick firing position. It felt like what History Channel did there but it likely didn't look anywhere near as well coordinated as that!
