Jump to content

-SF-Disarray

Members
  • Content Count

    746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

371 Excellent

About -SF-Disarray

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

872 profile views
  1. I specialize in translation from Russian to English and those subtitles are fine. The issue stems from English being, generally, less wordy than Russian; though sometimes Russian is less wordy than English. It is kind of an odd dynamic in translation.
  2. The ability to maneuver in the 110 is 'special' and that is me at my most diplomatic on the subject. I wouldn't use that particular plane as a yard stick for evaluating anything.
  3. Sure, here you go. That should be the 4 cleanest tests there. Blackout.rar
  4. So in doing these tests we were able to replicate the results that were reported. We ran the tests with a Tempest and a K-4 running line astern with about 30 m separation. We kept the speed, and rate of turn as close as we could between the two planes. I flew both the K-4 and the Tempest but with the K-4 leading the turn every time to control for pilot error. The Tempest pilot consistently blacked out before the 109 pilot. When the Tempest reports black out the 109 pilot reports losing color and some blacking towards the edges of the screen. I can provide the track files if you want to have a look at it and see if the discrepancy is on our end or in the planes.
  5. I have tacview and will do the requested test in a little bit.
  6. I think the Knights server is physically located in Germany. HARF, the group that runs it is largely Hungarian though as I understand things. I'm in the US and have decent ping to Knights most of the time and I'm just about as far away from the server as you can be and still be in the lower 48. I guess if you were down in Mexico or Central America your ping might be a little higher to Europe but it should be manageable; I regularly see people from South America there too.
  7. It might be an issue of your rocket not being big enough to kill the ship. Bombs, generally, do the job though.
  8. If the background of the map marker is solid, like the one you clicked on to spawn your plane but with the other side's national emblem on it, it is a spawn point. If, however, the background is kind of translucent, like the markers on or close to the front lines, it is a target meant for destruction.
  9. I would have thought, with all your experience with German planes, you'd have known that the FM of the 110 is as bogus as a $3 bill. But that is aside from the point. I'm uninterested in your opinion until you satisfy your own flimsy standard, Bann.
  10. The maps that might need a looking at are, in my opinion, the ones where you have 262's and K4's on the German side but no planes on the Allied side working at full performance. The Battle of Kalinin comes to mind but that is an older map that might not have been updated fully. The last new map that was put up, I forget the name but it centers around the fighting over Antwerp mostly and has the V1 launch sites, has a very similar set up as I understand. 150 grade fuel was in use in Europe early on by planes based in the UK at first, that much is true. But in May of '44 it was ordered that all 51's 47's and 38's in the 8th Air Force be modified to use 150 fuel and the fuel was flowing to the front line units within a week of the Normandy landings. At least that is what this paper says http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html and it looks like they've done their research. Before Bann decides that I'm just trying to get an easy fight for 'my side' I'm going to have to ask what makes him such an expert in Allied planes? He never plays the Allied side as far as I can tell. Maybe he should try them out for a bit and then have an opinion. After all it seemed to him that I needed to play Blue for a bit before I could be allowed an opinion. So, come on Bann, step out of your K4 and come play in the mud with the rest of us. You might learn something. Or are you just looking to get an easy fight for your side?
  11. Otto, don't assign me motives and I'll do you the same favor. The issue isn't that one side needs to be stronger all the time. I have been clear that this is an issue of a sensible standard being used for one side and an unreasonably favorable standard being used for the other; either that or ignoring historical factors for balance but seemingly when it benefits one side only. There really isn't more to it than that. Shocking, perhaps, but there it is. Were I a cynical and partisan person I'd say you are just trying to hold onto every advantage you can find for your side. I only ever see you on one side and were that one side have to face some of the historic realities of the game's setting you seem to think that your side wouldn't do very well. But, fortunately I'm not that cynical or partisan so you don't need to stave off such accusations.
  12. I didn't keep my notes from the tests so I can't give hard numbers but here is the broad strokes. Tempest v K4 both boosted: The Tempest accelerates a little faster at most altitudes though the top speeds are similar with the K4 being just slightly slower down low. The Tempest picks up speed in a dive slightly slower in a dive but will catch the K4 if there is enough vertical space (most of the time there isn't) and will slowly pull it in once things level out at the ground. In terms of maneuverability they are close but the Tempest has an edge if you maintain good throttle control; that said I have managed to get inside turns of Spitfire 9's with the K4 by taking some liberties in vertical manuring while the Spit stayed in a flat turn. The biggest edge in maneuverability the K4 has over the Tempest is in the G-forces. While neither has the G-suit blackouts in the Tempest are rapid in their onset and harsh in their effects while in the K4 they seem to come on slower giving more time to react and allowing you to ride the edge of blackout a little more reliably. All told it is a great fight and often decided by who has the better set up or can execute their plan better. The Tempest is strictly faster than the 190's down low, even the D9 can be run down by it but it takes time. In terms of raw power the 51 is faster than the G14 in a strait line and in a shallow dive but if the G14 can force a maneuvering engagement, say the catch them low or in the middle of another fight, the power to weight ratio of the G14 and the, I'm being charitable here, 'interesting' way the leading edge slats are modeled give the G14 some strengths to work with. Like with the K4-Tempest match up it isn't cut and dry and there is no advantage that stands head and shoulders above, once the fight is joined, but it is a very dynamic fight that often comes down to who has the better starting position, who sees and exploits situational advantages first/best or who's friend comes in to settle matters first. This is in the frame of low and middling altitude fighting. I haven't had many fights in any of the planes at or above 20k feet. Certainly not enough to draw any intelligent conclusions, though from what little information I have I suspect the trends would be similar. I just haven't found that many people that high that will take the fight, or who were up there in the first place. I also don't have much to say where flying the 190 is concerned. I don't much care for them as fighters. I like the kind of fight where you get stuck in, a knife fight if you like, and the 190 isn't at all well suited to this role. As bomber interceptors they are good, with the hard hitting cannon in numbers and they make great light bomb trucks, though.
  13. According to your own sources only 64 of those 155 planes were in fighting shape (41%), and of the 155 only 114 of the paper strength planes are K4's. Inflating the number of planes by nearly 2.5 times of effective air frames by including planes that couldn't be used or were different models seems like it might have an effect. Still I'm supersized that there were that many built, at least on paper, by that late in '44/early in '45 considering the state of German industrial capacity by then. Maybe I'm wrong but a plane that is gone all to pieces on the hanger floor seems about as useful as fuel that is still on the truck trundling to the front. Alonzo, that last bit wasn't intended to say the Allied rides are under powered. But there is this impression from some that German planes are somehow incapable of competing with their Allied counterparts, as Otto will tell you for example. So, the logic goes, it is only natural that Allied planes not be allowed to be used at their full potential, with their full horsepower, so as to give the poor German players a chance. I have not found this to be the case, however. In both head to head testing of various planes and in combat I have found German planes, particularly the 109's, to be very competitive pound for pound. That aside I know what it is like to be in a situation where the only choices available to a team are planes that are objectively less powerful in most categories and I know that it is a fight that can be won. I am nothing special in the game play department, if I can win the fight with fewer horsepower and a lower top speed surely others can too. They just might have to get creative.
  14. I feel, perhaps, I have not made myself clear enough. What bothers me isn't that plane sets are being balanced or that there is some semblance of parity. What bothers me is the uneven hand that seems to be applied when it comes to this fairness. The mission Legend of Y-29 is a prime example of this: Allied planes aren't afforded 150 octane fuel because it wasn't in use. Fine. But on that same mission, on the German side we find equal numbers of K4's as G14's, a situation that is frankly a historical fantasy. That early in year there simply weren't that many K4's built, let alone deployed to that part of the front. So the situation we have is one where one side can't have something because that is how it was while at the same time the other side can have something that was impossible. We could argue the merits of the K4 vs the G14 all day but that doesn't change the fact that there is a double standard at play. And before Otto comes in telling me that I should fight the good fight with the under powered machines and then talk, I've been there and done that for years. Learn to win against G4's in a Yak 1 or a LaGG 3 and we can talk.
  15. So, if I'm just paranoid, educate me. Why is it that on the bridge too far mission that no Allied plane can use 150 fuel even though it was widely available on the front at that time? Because the guy that made the mission already answered that one for me. The answer, in case you are curious, is because they felt the German planes available, the G-14 and A-8, would not be a match for Allied planes with 150 octane fuel. But on the mission Legend of Y-29 set just after the K-4 was rolling out in the first runs from the factory, there are as many K-4's as there are G-14's despite that being an impossibility of manufacturing rates, but there is no 150 octane fuel because it is too early for that kind of stuff. So Germans can have things that, historically, they shouldn't have in those numbers, but the Allied teams are constrained by historical reality. But by all means, make another pithy comment without engaging with the facts. It seems to be what you are good at.
×
×
  • Create New...