Request tacticle help for USN planes

[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.

[Derda508]

Does size matter? And nutrition? Well, we all know for sure that a bunch of ... let´s say tiny south-east Asians, fed on half a bowl of rice per day, could not stand against a modern army of well fed, tall, well trained and perfectly equipped .. ahem .. let´s say Westerners. They wouldn´t stand a chance, wouldn´t they? Except they did.
Just like the (in average) shorter Romans beat the shit out of the (in average) taller Celtic and Germanic warriors. Just like the (in average) short Huns and Mongols did later with the (in average) much taller European knights. And this was when fighting was physical. Tactics, strategy, motivation, numbers, leadership, logistics, technology, resource-management and a lot of other factors are what counts. Physical size never really did.
Size, by the way, is not a very good indicator for strength, toughness and endurance. I, as a European, worked quite some time in south and south-eastern Asia. I was much taller and (that was quite some time ago, when I did work-out regularly) much more beefy than our skinny, short workmen. But hell, they all were much stronger and much tougher than all of us Westerners, because they were used to constant hard labour since childhood (certainly not a healthy way of life and with 40 they looked like 60).
And statistics ... hrmmpf, I don´t reach the 180,2 cm that I should (although I am guilty of blue eyes) but all the male Korean relatives of my wife are taller than me ...

[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.

[Jumoschwanz]

Yet another thread where someone is disappointed that they can not win against the enemies aircraft by "dogfighting".

Always in the face of incredible overwhelming history that says dogfighting was far down the list of things that won the air war in WWII.

The United States and USSR advantage in WWII air combat was either in teamwork and/or overwhelming production capability. Japan was a tiny island and Germany was a tiny country, both with very limited resources.

It was the rare exception in WWII when an allied pilot with sensational flying ability was able to successfully dogfight with an experience Japanese pilot in a Japanese aircraft.
There are so many books, essays and articles filled with how the allied aircraft's advantage lay in speed and teamwork that it would take you a lifetime to read them all, but the ones everyone looks at are the very few where some good allied pilot used his bag of tricks to get his SBD, Wildcat, Hellcat etc. to fly toe to toe with some Jap pilot of questionable skill.

The only way to beat Aces flying Jap planes is to use an advantage in E or numbers, or to exploit a weakness in the AI.

All the bad things that ever happened to this sim have had allied Fan-Boys at the root of it, complaining that they can not dogfight with Axis craft, or that their machine guns for some reason are not as powerful as CANNONS. They will look for anyway to get things done except for the way it was done in history, including hacking the official patches of IL2.

[MaxGunz]

Originally Posted by Jumoschwanz

Yet another thread where someone is disappointed that they can not win against the enemies aircraft by "dogfighting".

Always in the face of incredible overwhelming history that says dogfighting was far down the list of things that won the air war in WWII.

The United States and USSR advantage in WWII air combat was either in teamwork and/or overwhelming production capability.

Untrue. Both the US and USSR made faster planes in time to often have the equal or better plane to the German ones. Dogfighting ... see what the highest scoring German Aces wrote about dogfighting. Numbers ... East Front 1941-1942 ... who had the numbers and the faster planes?

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Dogfighting is for biplanes and beginners.

Japan was a tiny island and Germany was a tiny country, both with very limited resources.

They picked the fight.

It was the rare exception in WWII when an allied pilot with sensational flying ability was able to successfully dogfight with an experience Japanese pilot in a Japanese aircraft.
There are so many books, essays and articles filled with how the allied aircraft's advantage lay in speed and teamwork that it would take you a lifetime to read them all, but the ones everyone looks at are the very few where some good allied pilot used his bag of tricks to get his SBD, Wildcat, Hellcat etc. to fly toe to toe with some Jap pilot of questionable skill.

Stanley Vejtasa in an SBD took 3 Zeros down in a fight with many. He had a much slower and less maneuverable plane and they had numbers. Please re-iterate how the Allies only won through numbers. That was October 1942. Would you say that Japan had so few good pilots then that none of those were attackers were good?

In every air force there are the few that count for half or more of all victories. But while it's okay to champion Joachim Marseilles it is bad to champion Joe Foss? It must be so if you feel so bad over what are no more than little boy's arguments for national pride.

The only way to beat Aces flying Jap planes is to use an advantage in E or numbers, or to exploit a weakness in the AI.

All the bad things that ever happened to this sim have had allied Fan-Boys at the root of it, complaining that they can not dogfight with Axis craft, or that their machine guns for some reason are not as powerful as CANNONS. They will look for anyway to get things done except for the way it was done in history, including hacking the official patches of IL2.

Have you forgotten the first YEARS of IL2? Russian Lazers? My FW doesn't turn fast enough. My 109 can't do this thing in my book. German whine and Russian cheese on German and English forums while on Russian forums the tastes reversed.

Maybe you are not forgetting. Maybe you didn't arrive until later but that's how it went.

[Igo kyu]

The best boom and zoom planes were axis (German), the best turn and burn planes were axis (Japanese (or did the Hurricane really out-turn them as it does in this sim?)).

To say the axis has only turn and burn planes, is as silly as to say they only had boom and zoom planes, they had both, but they weren't the same planes or in the same theatres.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

Dogfighting is for biplanes and beginners.

Cobblers, dogfighting is for the guy in the plane that turns best. You have to know which plane is which.

[MaxGunz]

LOL, turning ability and the power to keep it up are relative and as in all cases depends on the pilot. Angles fighting limits options by wasting energy. It has far less potential than energy fighting.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by Jumoschwanz

The United States and USSR advantage in WWII air combat was either in teamwork and/or overwhelming production capability.

and/or better performing aircraft, better trained pilots, better logistics, better weapons, tougher aircraft, better strategic and/or tactical doctrine, better recon and/or whatnotelse. I don't really know what kind of statement you were trying to make, but taking it at face value, it is far from the truth.