omg the meserchmitch i so easy to shoot with the spit i love it

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by JG14_Josf

How is that perfection measured exactly?

If the answer is ambiguous then the opinion is just an opinion. If there is an interest by anyone, at any time, to get past opinion, and reach for facts instead, then there are very specific ways to do that, if there is an interest of course.

Sorry Josf, I ment perfect for me - in my opinion of a frequent 109 pilot. I hope it makes sense now.

You go ahead and measure it for us - after all you were banned from the forums only, not from playing the game and flying say on ATAG. I am looking forward for any facts you provide.

[raaaid]

i like duels

shooting a 109 with a spit in a duel too easy

going for a duel agains a spit in a 109 pointless

i rememebr how excited i got when i read in the manual machines were so close in performance it was up to the man not the machine

but i have xperience enough to know history recreated in games is rewritten by forum whinners

hey i have my deal of influence with the game when i made that thread in ubi saying the console should say a pilot got murdered not roasted extracrispy i was called troll but i was just shaping the game as all forumites

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by raaaid

i like duels

shooting a 109 with a spit in a duel too easy

going for a duel agains a spit in a 109 pointless

i rememebr how excited i got when i read in the manual machines were so close in performance it was up to the man not the machine

but i have xperience enough to know history recreated in games is rewritten by forum whinners

hey i have my deal of influence with the game when i made that thread in ubi saying the console should say a pilot got murdered not roasted extracrispy i was called troll but i was just shaping the game as all forumites

Try a 'duel' with some good 109 pilot who won't turn with you.

[raaaid]

Originally Posted by Robo.

Try a 'duel' with some good 109 pilot who won't turn with you.

every duel is a turning contest as i see it

the old times of the sims where every fight was a turning duel followed by a salute were like wwi and were fun

modern sim times are wwii all about caughting a busy unaware prey with bnz

no wonder there are no more salutes

with a turning duel my heartbeat gets to 120 caughting an unware busy prey with a 190 my heartbeat is 70


but whose so stupid to get in a turning duel with all those air vultures around with a porked plane that cant do other thing to score that to be ungentelmanlike by not having a duel but only attacking with adavantage

how can you justify a vrtual killingin in which your foe had no chance

thats what the game promotes there CAN NOT BE FAIR DUELS

either you have e adavantage not fair

either your coE not fair for the 109

either you have e disadavantage not fair

a game to be fun has to be fair

i miss what the manual said what was true in the begining of the game:

machines SO CLOSE IN PERFORMANCE is up to the pilot

edit:

maybe this doesnt make any sense:

but i would like TO RISK MY LIFE FOR MY FOOD climb high to get fruits where i can fall and die and kill animals to eat them who can defend and kill me

as a matter of fact if i made brade id shape with the mass hornes and spines so it can hurt you if you mistreat it

modern times is like flying an eurofighter against camels im sure some would love it but not my style

[JG14_Josf]

Sorry Josf, I ment perfect for me - in my opinion of a frequent 109 pilot. I hope it makes sense now.

Anyone,

I do not know why the attitude expressed above is chosen or perhaps it is just a reaction to what I wrote.

Opinions are one thing, facts are another thing, and when opinions support the facts, then that is what can happen too.

If someone says plane A is perfect for Energy Fighting, then that is an opinion.

What, someone else may ask, measures this condition of perfection, since someone may be curious to know what is being used to form that opinion.

Why the answer isn't the answer requested is entirely up to the person with the opinion.

I hope it makes sense now.

What is meant by the words " the 109 is perfect energy fighter "?

I hope that the question makes sense now.

You go ahead and measure it for us

Why does my writing inspire someone to give me permission to do something I already do, as if I need someone's permission?

after all you were banned from the forums only

If that is factual then I'd like to know as much, as far as I know I was not banned from this forum. Can I take your word on that fact?

"not from playing the game and flying say on ATAG"

I was on last night with 2 in our squad. Why do you assume so much, and why do you feel that your interest in my activities are worthy of mention on this topic?

Why is the topic turning into my personal life, according to you?

"I am looking forward for any facts you provide."

Which facts?

1.
As far as I know I was not banned on this forum.
2.
I fly the ATAG server regularly with other members of the squad I joined.
3.
My question to you had to do with how "the 109 is perfect energy fighter" and you responded by ignoring the question, and then turning the "discussion" into my personal activities.
4.
You are giving me permission to do things that I do not need your permission to do, nor do I want your permission.

Those facts?

How about a measure for unloaded (dive) acceleration between a Spitfire and a 109 in the game?

If there is no significant difference then the Spitfire is as perfect an energy fighter as is the 109 and the same cannot be said for angles fighting since the Spitfire is significantly better at angles fighting, more along the lines of "perfect" since the 109 is more along the lines of "imperfect" in relative sustained turn performance in level flight.

How about a measure of corner velocity compared between the Spitfire and 109?

How about an actual answer to the actual question asked instead of diversion from the question asked, and diversion onto me personally?

How about that fact?

How is that perfection measured exactly?

That was the topic question asked after the following subjective opinion was made:

the 109 is perfect energy fighter

If people buying the game are finding the game being constantly adjusted to suit the wishes of a select few forum members, as documented on this forum, and they are then asking questions concerning the legitimacy of those viewpoints, as is documented on this forum, then it is my opinion that those people deserve an accurate answer, and they do not deserve to have their persons attacked in this manner.

How about that fact?

[Robo.]

Hi Josf, it is indeed an opinion of mine and I said so. I am looking forward to see you on ATAG then, I am not sure what time zone you're in, I fly main GMT during the day and sometimes in the evenings. I assumed you don't fly this sim at all because of what you're saying about FMs, but if you do, that's very good.

If you're interested in measuring the parameters you keep mentioning, I hope you will do so one day and will share your results. I am not entirely sure why you feel I get personal, I simply wonder why don't you spend the time you're asking questions on this forums by actually testing the stuff you want to know (measure the FM parameters I suppose). Good luck with that.

*edit* - just found a way of measuring your performance o ATAG - 58 sorties, 12 kills (0.21 kps), 14 deaths, only 19 landings - not very impressive for a 109 pilot. Just my opinion of course.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by JG14_Josf

Why does my writing inspire someone to give me permission to do something I already do, as if I need someone's permission?

So you are allready doing 'it'?

Well than it should be a simply mater for you to share your findings.. right?

Assuming that is the case, would/could you be so kind as to provide a link to your test results that you claim you have allready done and didn't need permission to do?

In the mean time I will share what I have done in the way of testing the FMs

www.flightsimtesting.com

Just click on the CoD tab at the top

[SlipBall]

Well in my opinion both sides are guilty of taking a great sim, and reducing it to a dumbed down plane on rails when piloting. In fact it is so bad that I can not bring myself to fly it, unless I am on-line, and thats never....all the charm of flying that vintage 1930's technology is gone, it's really a bore now. I fly everyday the older release, and it is so much enjoyment for me. If only the radio commands worked I would have it made.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by raaaid

every duel is a turning contest as i see it

That's the clearest indication you don't know how to fly your aircraft correctly.

the old times of the sims where every fight was a turning duel followed by a salute were like wwi and were fun

Suggest you go fly RISE OF FLIGHT if you like WWI. The German also generally have the better turning aircraft there.

but i would like TO RISK MY LIFE FOR MY FOOD climb high to get fruits where i can fall and die and kill animals to eat them who can defend and kill me

Ahh... No exactly sure what you are talking about here... However its been a long time since we were monkey's in the trees, we have evolved to the point we do most of our climbing in aircraft.

[JG14_Josf]

Hi Josf, it is indeed an opinion of mine and I said so.

What is the purpose of repeating the same thing over and over again?

The statement was made that the 109 is a perfect energy fighter.

How do you measure that perfection?

Is that impossible to answer?

I am looking forward to see you on ATAG then, I am not sure what time zone you're in, I fly main GMT during the day and sometimes in the evenings.

What would be the point of you looking forward to seeing me in ATAG when your version of discussion is to turn topic questions into personal matters?

I assumed you don't fly this sim at all because of what you're saying about FMs, but if you do, that's very good.

What exactly do you mean when you say that I have said something about FMs? How is this, again, turned from a discussion about measurable performance variables, such as corner speed, level acceleration, dive acceleration, zoom climb deceleration, and other relative performance variables known by the professionals to be variables that determine which plane is the better Energy Fighter and which plane is not the better energy fighter, turned from that to something personal about me, and what you think my words might tell you about what I do personally?

If you're interested in measuring the parameters you keep mentioning, I hope you will do so one day and will share your results.

Level flight acceleration tests happen all the time in the game, in combat, or in formation flying, and corner speed tests are similarly tested all the time, in the game, during combat, with relative results, along with dive acceleration tests, zoom tests, and when two planes dive and one gets away from the other there are test results, one gets away from the other, and when one catches the other, there are test results, one catches the other.

That is done by the players many times while using the game software and if the track files work, then those types of combat tests and those results are recorded that way, on track files, when those tests, done those ways, are recorded on those track files.

No opinion involved, the game records the actual test results for anyone to see at any time on any track file showing exactly what happens when it happens the way it happens.

This can happen:

"the 109 is perfect energy fighter"

How does that happen?

To be able to communicate why it happens the way it happens, one plane catching another plane, in a dive, or in a zoom, or in a turn at corner, or in a sustained turn, the specific TEST where planes, pilots, and software are TESTED has to be evaluated and known as to what was done by who and when, in combat, or a controlled experiment can be conducted.

In the actual tests performed according to the methods refined by the professional pilots, such as the Naviar test methods, or the test methods used by the British in World War II when they tested relative performance between the planes they captured and their own planes, those methods are well spelled out, and more than one person doing the tests, and more than one test result, improves the accuracy of the tests.

I have done a corner speed test for the 109 so far, my result is a corner speed of less than 350 km/h and the pilot g limit, not the plane g limit, limits the g load for that test result of 350 km/h (less than) for the 109.

I did that test with the last patch, not this new patch.

That is an individual test, and it could be plotted out on an Energy Maneuverability Chart, which would be one plot on the accelerated stall line.

If there is a Spitfire corner speed number then the better plane could be known, assuming that both numbers are accurate.

Side by side tests leave less room for error, one plane turns a tighter turn at maximum g, and that can be recorded on a track file, and both pilots can switch planes, which works as a control on the experiment.

Corner Speed is a vital number in determining which plane is the superior fighter plane and Corner Speed tests add more information that can be very useful in determining which tactics work best for which plane. Which plane at corner speed in a diving turn will turn the tighter turn, at a faster rate, and lose less altitude compared to the opposition?

The methods used by the British in determining which captured plane they had flying in their tests by their own pilots side by side against their own planes included dive and zoom tests and those results of those tests, at least for the 190 are well publicized in several books. Those types of professional relative combat performance tests require a number of pilots performing the tests cooperatively - side by side - to see which plane actually performs better in which vital area, such as which plane can accelerate and get away from the other plane in a dive.

What makes one plane a perfect energy fighter compared to another plane?

I have not done controlled, side by side, experiments as yet. If I do that, I can certainly report the findings right here.

The real time combat simulation tests, or uncontrolled experiments, happen all the time, on the servers, it is fun too.

One pilot in one plane tests to see if that plane can get away from another plane, and one pilot in another plane tests to see if that plane can catch the other plane.

What is meant by the words " the 109 is perfect energy fighter "?

I'd like to know.

"I am not entirely sure why you feel I get personal, I simply wonder why don't you spend the time you're asking questions on this forums by actually testing the stuff you want to know (measure the FM parameters I suppose)."

You are getting personal in that example right there, so the reason why you don't know why you do the things you do are not within my power to know. When you get personal, that is what you do, exemplified with the example you provide in the words just quoted, and my feelings about what you do are my feelings about what you do; the fact that you do what you do is a fact, which is separate from my feelings of anything, which are my personal business.

1.
What you do is you get personal.
2.
What you do not do is answer the question asked.
3.
I may or may not feel this or that, as you may assume I feel, even if I tell you that I do not feel the way you think I feel.
4.
What you do and what I feel are two different things.

why you feel I get personal

You get personal.

Why are you turning what you do into me feeling something?

"I simply wonder why don't you spend the time you're asking questions on this forums by actually testing the stuff..."

You are, again, turning a discussion on relative combat performance into what I do with my time.

Why do you continue to do that even while you claim that your willful actions are my feelings?

You do what you do, my feelings are my feelings, that is two things, not one, your actions are not the same thing as my feelings.

Good luck with that.

Good luck with my feelings? Good luck with trying to get a simple answer to a simple question on this forum? Good luck with having fun with the game I enjoy because it is the best simulation of World War II combat flight simulation despite the fact that the 109 is modeled without the historical advantages it did have according to so many sources documenting those facts, where those FACTS are noncontroversial, such as dive speed acceleration where this happens:

"It was a small airplane with a very weighty engine and it could dive very quickly and it could escape very quickly so the tactics were largely determined by them."

If that does not happen in the game then how is the 109 any more perfect of an energy fighter than the Spitfire in the game, in your opinion?

Is that on topic? Does that have anything to do with yours or my personal life?

I think the question is valid, in my opinion. I don't think that I need any luck in getting the answer. The answer is easy to find, easy to know.

A perfect Energy Fighter was well explained in the quote by Eric Brown, and there are many more perfectly good explanations provided in the book by Robert Shaw, and there are many very good methods of finding out exactly which plane has better Energy Maneuverability as documented by the modern professionals whose job is to find out that vital information, as shown in the Naviar links.

*edit* - just found a way of measuring your performance o ATAG - 58 sorties, 12 kills (0.21 kps), 14 deaths, only 19 landings - not very impressive for a 109 pilot. Just my opinion of course.

You claim this:

I am not entirely sure why you feel I get personal

How about answering a question that is on-topic instead of repeatedly turning the discussion into my personal life?

You claim this:

the 109 is perfect energy fighter

That is, so far, a baseless statement of ambiguous opinion.

What, if there are any actual facts to back up that opinion, backs up that opinion?

Am I attacking your personal life, your personal score, your personal use of your personal time, or asking you for your personal time zone, or what you feel at any given moment?

Now someone who may want to join in on this forum is encourage to do so by the fact that their personal score may be published by someone seeking to gain some nebulous advantage in an argument of their sole creation?

Is that the point?

How about answering a simple question?

the 109 is perfect energy fighter

How is that measured?