Request tacticle help for USN planes

[horseback]

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

From what I hear , the Zero wing thickness was much larger than normal allowing better lift and maneuverability at low speed.. but the thick wing caused airflow disruption over the wing and control surfaces at high speeds.. causing the controls to lock.

The pilot stick forces required would be, from the pilots POV, dependent on stick length and force applied, and strength of pilot.. not size.

It would be harder to move the stick all the way at higher speeds, but to execute, say a roll at X-Degrees per second, you require less control surface deflection to execute the same maneuver, than at lower speeds.

200 kts is about 227mph, or less than 370kph--not exactly a blistering pace by WWII standards, and kind of low for the onset of compressibility at medium altitudes and below for an aircraft capable of around an estimated 350 mph (as I understand it, the Zero's actual top speed is a subject of debate).

US pilots testing various models of the Zero both during and after the war have commented on the heaviness of the controls, particularly the ailerons above that relatively low speed, and how light they are at the preferred dogfighting speeds of the Japanese fighter pilot. A standard joystick's 'throw' or arc is limited by the pilot's thighs in most cases, so you have to think that the roll axis of the Zero's stick is limited to a relatively small arc; precise control at high force is very difficult to achieve, and the designer of a fighter has to figure out a way to balance stick forces at a range of speeds desired by his specifications. Jiro Horikoshi, the designer of the A6M, tried to keep his customer satisfied.

The average Japanese male in 1941 was sixty two inches tall and weighed about 125 lbs. The average American male in the same era was sixty nine inches tall and weighed 165 lbs. Even though greater than normal physical strength and coordination are qualities that are common among WWII era fighter pilots, one must at least suspect that being 11% taller and almost 30% heavier, all other things being equal, will usually make you MUCH stronger. As NFL football coach Bill Parcells once observed, in a contest that puts a premium on strength and speed, a good big man will usually dominate a great small man.

cheers

horseback

[RPS69]

Hmm... size of the pilot... a small but strong man, could move in spaces where the big man can not. It's leverage will be hampered by the reduced space.
Of all those physic assumptions, most ended as simple nonsense.
I also remember the asumptions on japanese pilots diet, and their probably bad sighting capacity... after all, all japanese wear glasses, isnt 'it? :/

[horseback]

Originally Posted by RPS69

Hmm... size of the pilot... a small but strong man, could move in spaces where the big man can not. It's leverage will be hampered by the reduced space.
Of all those physic assumptions, most ended as simple nonsense.
I also remember the asumptions on japanese pilots diet, and their probably bad sighting capacity... after all, all japanese wear glasses, isnt 'it? :/

Size does matter; the Zero's cockpit is reportedly roomier than the Bf 109's, so an average modern Westerner fits comfortably. We're not talking about a tiny tunnel, so the sort of stick movements we are discussing give a leverage advantage to the man with the longer arms and broader shoulders. Shorter levers require more force to accomplish the same work, simple as that.

I made no assumptions about Japanese pilots' diet, beyond what their own memoirs tell me, and what they tell me is that in the latter stages of the Solomons campaign (early to mid 1943 and after), the Japanese supply chain was in serious trouble, while the Allied supply chain was becoming much better and more reliable by the day, just as it was in the ETO and Med. German and Axis soldiers undoubtedly became less effective when they were forced to get by on reduced rations short on important nutrients, else we were just shooting and bombing their supply lines for the fun of it.

The Japanese memoirs also report that it definitely had an effect, just as it had an effect on US pilots who also suffered through the malaria and short rations in the early New Guinea and Guadalcanal campaigns. As for the crack about glasses, you're projecting racism where there is none.

If you don't like my opinions, produce facts to counter them.

cheers

horseback

[RPS69]

Originally Posted by horseback

Size does matter; the Zero's cockpit is reportedly roomier than the Bf 109's, so an average modern Westerner fits comfortably. We're not talking about a tiny tunnel, so the sort of stick movements we are discussing give a leverage advantage to the man with the longer arms and broader shoulders. Shorter levers require more force to accomplish the same work, simple as that.

I made no assumptions about Japanese pilots' diet, beyond what their own memoirs tell me, and what they tell me is that in the latter stages of the Solomons campaign (early to mid 1943 and after), the Japanese supply chain was in serious trouble, while the Allied supply chain was becoming much better and more reliable by the day, just as it was in the ETO and Med. German and Axis soldiers undoubtedly became less effective when they were forced to get by on reduced rations short on important nutrients, else we were just shooting and bombing their supply lines for the fun of it.

The Japanese memoirs also report that it definitely had an effect, just as it had an effect on US pilots who also suffered through the malaria and short rations in the early New Guinea and Guadalcanal campaigns. As for the crack about glasses, you're projecting racism where there is none.

If you don't like my opinions, produce facts to counter them.

cheers

horseback

For sure! USAAF reports after the war, stated that shorter men, will support higher G's than taller men. So your big man, can't stand high G's as well as a shorty one.
So your big men, were perfect boom and zoomers, while your tiny japs, were excelent dogfighters. That's the kind of conclusions you can achieve with a single approach on those reports.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Telling, the japanes pilots were generally weak, is some kind of rassism. Little bit...

[Jure_502]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Telling, the japanes pilots were generally weak, is some kind of rassism. Little bit...

True. Serial high esteem of Americans can really get's annoying after a while, especially when it comes to war.

[ElAurens]

Gents, please don't paint all of my countrymen with the same broad brush.

We are not all racists.

The Japanese defeat in WW2 had nothing to do with their size, or their race. It had everything to do with their mindset, their poor understanding of how the US, The British Empire, China, and the Netherlands East Indies, would react, and their inability to consolodate their newly gained holdings after the first six months of the war. ( "Victory Disease" as it was called later by the Japanese). And most significantly the inability of Japanese industry to produce the engines of war in the numbers and quality necessary.

The Japanese bet everything on a lightening campaign that would shock the Allies to the bargaining table. They commited all their reserves out of the gate. To be sure at the time their and our perceptions of each other were very racist, and all mostly wrong.

They saw the west as a bunch of fat, lazy shopkeepers who could never be warriors, and we saw the Japanese as short, near sighted, dull witted people that were no threat.

Obviously neither assesment was correct.

[horseback]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Telling, the japanes pilots were generally weak, is some kind of rassism. Little bit...

There is a big difference between pointing out that one group of generally larger people might be exert more strength/control in a given set of circumstances than another group composed of generally smaller people and asserting that the reason is inherent racial superiority. If you pick five Croatians who are over 200cm tall and have them play basketball against five other Croatians who average 175 cm, it is not unreasonable to expect the taller group to be more successful, and it has nothing to do with race. One might think that my being American is causing you to make racial/nationalist assumptions about me.

The Zero, like all of the main Japanese early war fighters was optimized for a certain kind of combat, based on the preferences of the IJN's senior aviators and their technical staffs. That choice required sacrificing certain other capabilities and limiting others in order to obtain the qualities they considered more important. Some of those choices limited the potential top speed and maneuverability at the higher speeds where Western fighter designs were generally superior. It was noted fairly early on that at higher speeds the Zeros didn't have nearly the margin of maneuverability over their opponents that they enjoyed in close-in dogfights where being light and having good climb/acceleration allowed them to make use of their ailerons and elevators at maximum efficiency.

The loss of maneuverability was markedly disproportionate to the increased speeds, and American tests of the recovered 'Aleutian' Zero in the fall/winter of 1942 revealed that the stick became uncomfortably stiff at 200 kts and the faster you were going, the more difficult it became to exert fine control; I merely pointed out that it would be even more difficult for smaller men to handle, and it gets blown into some sort of racial slur.

I think that my original point was that this particular fault is not modeled in the game, but someone latched onto the 'smaller man/people' comment instead of recognizing the main point that the game often ignores some historically significant factors.

cheers

horseback

[MaxGunz]

Stick forces have always been modeled in IL2. All pilots are the same strength in IL2. All. IRL pilots from the same country varied as to strength.

As to national averages and military jobs it is ridiculous to say that those in the jobs are represented by the national average.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by horseback

The loss of maneuverability was markedly disproportionate to the increased speeds, and American tests of the recovered 'Aleutian' Zero in the fall/winter of 1942 revealed that the stick became uncomfortably stiff at 200 kts and the faster you were going, the more difficult it became to exert fine control; I merely pointed out that it would be even more difficult for smaller men to handle, and it gets blown into some sort of racial slur.

I see how your statements could be percieved as racism, but I don't think they were.
But I fail to see how the averagely bigger, stronger pilot necessarily has an advantage over the smaller one. He MAY have, but if the construction of the cockpit is optimised for the smaller pilot he MAY even be at a disadvantage. We would have to put two or more test candidates into a Zero pit and see what stick force they could exert to be absolutely sure.
And even then I don't see the point - there are many other abilities that I'd like to see in a fighter pilot before considering physical ability, e.g. eyesight, advanced combat maneuvres, team tactics, marksmanship.
Just imagine that the all the rookie Japanese fighter pilots in 1943 would look like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his best days - but still have the same lack of training - would they have done any better?
And then imagine they all had top notch eyesight and 5000h of training - they could have looked like Homer Simpson and still would have had an impact.
A certain level of physical fitness is needed though, a fat astmathic will never be a fine fighter pilot - no matter how keen his eyesight is.

And I'm glad IL2 does not model different countries pilots differently - that would just open a can of very slimy worms.
Could be interesting to randomly have different pilot models - as selectable difficulty option -and the AI would be affected, too.