Jump to content

chuter

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    518
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

143 Excellent

About chuter

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Chino, California

Recent Profile Visitors

1068 profile views
  1. The Russians overboosted the heck out of the P-39 admitting that if they operated it "by the book" it would have been a dog. So the engine life was reduced somewhat, they had a war to fight - lol.
  2. It's almost like the game play manual is an Easter egg. That's what I would think, but it seems there's a sizable community of tank commanders that want to simply give the order to shoot at will.
  3. He said "statue". hehe
  4. Regarding the 152H, I recall (strictly memory here, my life's belongings are in storage) a pilot saying the H had a ridiculously slow initial roll response, but laughed and quickly added that it wasn't as bad as the P-38, and yet once in a turn in front of a Mustang could arrive on the Mustang's tail in three and a half turns. Of note here is that initial roll response isn't modeled so this likely wouldn't be an issue in game. The H's low speed acceleration was supposed to be dramatic as well. In reality there were huge issues with the type being rushed into production with next to no development but they all paled in comparison to a sky full of allied aircraft so it would be interesting how or even if some of the issues could be modeled.
  5. I have a full size copy of a an original 109G10 print showing all movable surfaces rigging and travel and includes boost tab equipped ailerons. These boost tabbed ailerons wouldn't have been deemed necessary on early 109s for two reasons, 1) the higher relative speed of the 109 versus its enemies meant it didn't have to rapidly maneuver at higher speeds and 2) that same higher speed was relatively slow by later 109 models standards. In the end the boosted ailerons were never installed (at least in a functional way) though the reason is unknown, possibly due to the tab adversely effecting the ailerons at slower speeds.
  6. Yeah, I preferred the old mouse control as well.
  7. The boundary layer removal didn't have any real payoff as the steep angle of the duct inlet caused a duct stall as high speeds were reached and turbulent flow went through the upper part of the cooler anyway. It was deemed more desirable to have a much simpler duct to make and a slightly larger cooler that could slightly mitigate the high speed turbulent airflow. The Spitfire had exactly this same cooling problem, its the result of having too little space to shoe-horn a too big cooling system into. As far as gear leg rake is concerned, the Spitfire series also increased the rake, 5.5° beginning with the Vc so there should be a difference between the Vb and the IX.
  8. The unboosted ailerons traveled 25° up and 20° down inducing little adverse yaw. The boosted ailerons traveled 25° up and 25° down inducing some adverse yaw (rolling right swings nose left) but increasing overall roll performance across the envelope.
  9. No problems here. Maybe OSHA or Health and Safety have intervened for the protection of those deemed unqualified to safely exercise the privilege of operating flare guns. Just a thought.
  10. I'm specifically talking about the invisible things. Why is the player penalized for failing to avoid the invisible? Usually, as far as I can tell, its invisible trees. One will also have to explain to me what kind of injuries we're talking about that can have such a dramatic effect on vision while otherwise leaving the combatant able to function. I've had a lot of injuries in my time and only once was my vision effected for more than five minutes, and that case only involved one eye. But I understand it's a good game mechanic so I should give it a rest.
  11. Not a fan of the health bar approach at all (its used for everything but the armor) but the crew HBs are problematic for two reasons: 1)The crew don't recover at all, regardless of how minor the initial injury and 2)as long as there are invisible trees you will have injured crew members. The basic effect of injury is increasing loss of vision, so much for the helmets they wear. I've driven across the Finnish map a few times only to not be able to ID targets because of all the invisible trees I've hit along the way, it's rather frustrating. Am I the only one experiencing this?
  12. One reason I usually take the Sherman when I play red is the .50. I've shot down a dozen planes now on the Finnish server.
  13. As red I tend to take the Sherman as it has slightly better AP/APHE performance and I get a kick out of shooting down aircraft with the .50. Gunsight sucks ...
  14. I really don't think this speaks directly to a desperate logistics situation on the German side* so much as to the Russians being willing to go to a fair amount of work to ditch the T34's steel rimmed wheels whenever the opportunity presented itself. They just swapped the Panther wheels for their steel rimmed wheels and left their old wheels with the Panther. Again, there are numerous photos of T34s with Panther wheels. I very much agree with you on the other photos. *Other than lack of fuel or spare parts to keep the vehicle running so it wouldn't be abandoned in the face of a soviet advance.
×
×
  • Create New...