![]() |
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Seafire should NOT out turn a Zero at mid to low speed ever. In 1943 pilots went to Darwin from Europe to help with air raids from Timor. They were told by the experianced RAAF pilots not to turn with Zeros, but they did anyways since that was their reaction from fighting the luftwaffe with a more maneuverable aircraft. They got staved on, hard, until they switched tactics and BnZ'd the Zekes. They were the last group of allied pilots to learn this the hard knock way. The Seafire is faster then the Wildcat, climbs better then the wildcat, but will not out turn it. The wildcat was closer to the Zeke then any other western aircraft in terms of turn performance, but not better then the Zeke by any means. 'More maneuverable' does not translate into 'turns better', it encompases all maneuver, both vertical and horizontal. I think the Seafire is spot on personally.
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Based on that it is suprising to see that The F4 is described in the AC guide has having 'poor maneouverability' and the Seafire as having 'excellent'. I am no expert so my judgements were based on flying these ac based on the guide and in the Dgen Pacific campaigns. I have taken on board the advice and changed tactics with the 4.10 Seafire with better results - thanks guys!
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
two words
Got Track? |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
You mean Headtracking? If so, too damned right I have! |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
No a recorded track file of your 'testing' so others can review your methods to see if any errors were made during said 'test'
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
I see,
, dumbass me! As in IL NT Tracks but where can I upload them for the experts to look at or do you mean using something like FRAPPS?
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
RE: Your previous comment the energy fighting style doesn't require reaction times any quicker than turn fighting. In fact I've shrugged off turn fighting as it's too twitchy and I'm finding that I'm not reacting as fast as I used to. Also it's not as survivable... energy fighting is by far the best way to go unless the plane you fly prohibits it. The Spitfire is pretty good both ways but against the Zero and Oscar energy fight is the only way to go. Reaction time isn't as important as precise and well calculated deflection shooting. My suggestion is to setup the QMB with a dozen C-47 transports and practice shooting them. The rule is that you have to be diving from a superior altitude or attacking from an angle. No sitting behind and chewing them up. You will positively suck at first but then you will get better. The C-47 is perfect because it's big, slow and the AI usually flies a straight line.
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
The raw track file would be better in that one could than use one of the many DeviceLink utilities to ouput/log the flight data (altitude, IAS speed, engine temp, elevator deflection, throttle setting, etc) to a file.. Than we can not only see your test but your corsponding inputs and the planes outputs
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'd be curious to read the definition of "maneuverable" as defined by people in this thread.
Not a condemnation, just wondering if we are all talking about the same thing. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't think anyone has defined it as such but an interesting question that I would have to really think hard about before attempting to answer. At the most basic defintion I suppose 'how easy (or the reluctance) to move into various or different positions'. Pretty sure there may be very different interpretations from flying enthusiasts, particularly from an 'acrobatic' perspective which combines pilot skill with 'maneouverabilty'.
I have recorded a few track files so will find a webspace and get them uploaded asap. Last edited by SEE; 02-05-2011 at 03:29 AM. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|