Why I dislike IL-2 games..

[bobbysocks]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

And if you really have a problem with Russian planes, you should just do like you're supposed to do in a P-51, and that is to boom and zoom. Hit and Run tactics, are what make up the P-51s high kill rate. Turning and Burning, are what make up Russian tactics and fighters.

in a word..NO! P 51s were not zoom and boomers. they were never designed as such but as long range bomber escorts and down and dirty dogfighters. how do i know this? 2 sources. #1 my father flew one in the war. have the films, have the combat reports, have the stories. none of his 7.5 victories were zoom and boom. #2 this link...all 51 jocks reports..

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...t-reports.html

read through these and tell me how many were Z&B? very, very few. latching onto targets of opportunity...a 190/109 crossing in front of them at the right moment...hell yes. but i would guarantee the same situation was available to russian and LW pilots in the heat of battle. hit and run was used by every country for the initial attack. to ambush...use the element surprise was everyone's tactic....it was after that where the real fighting began. some dove way, some mixed it up. LW pilots adopted this tactic because their main objective was the bombers....fighters werent going to wreak havoc on the motherland...why waste time or risk lives on them?
i will not dispute anything you say about soviet ac but this i will challenge you on and back it up by pilot accounts. the 51 was a mid/high long range altitude bomber escort. but was on par with just about everything at lower levels....again read those reports. the main strategy of LW pilots ( if they didnt bail) was to dive for the deck. a vast number of dogfights ended up well below 5k feet ( actually well below 1k). they might have started at 25 or 30k where the bombers were....but i would say more than half ended up in lower altitudes. the 51 held its own at the lower levels. as for turning....the 51 and all allied pilots knew and were schooled which turn to get the lw ac in. 109s sucked in a left hand turns...probably due to engine torgue, etc. so they tried to coax them into that kind of battle. you will see the term "luftberry"...that is a turning battle where ac are lined up like spokes on a wheel...you will also read where the 51 pilots closed the gap in turning battles with in 1 or 2 cycles. they did this dropping 10 degrees of flaps or slamming the elevator trim wheel to get the edge or flying the ac to the point of a stall. it was stated here where lw pilots were told never to dogfight with yaks below 5k... 'stang pilots were never told not to engage lw ac at any altitude. it was go and get'em... and they did to great success. 51s influence spread across continents as they flew missions from england to land in russia. did any yaks or soviet ac go from the the ussr to england? no, why? the eastern airwar and the western airwar were 2 complete different animals and you can not begin to equate the two. had germany adopted a high altitude ( 25k and above) bomber tactic/strategy russian planes and tactics would have evolved much differently. the ussr was able to use the P 39 to great success where in the western airwar it would have never been a real factor in battle. i will never say the 51 was the best fighter of ww2....i will say for the specific role it played it was. every plane designed had a specific task and arena in which it was intended to compete. its all apple and oranges...the roles of ac...the types of battles...and never shall the twaint meet. nor should they. yaks were yaks and 'stangs were 'stangs and the both did what they were designed to.....