Take Note : Boom 'n Zoom is not allowed... you have to dogfight!

August 13, 2015

lol at the people who still think boom and zoomn is a fighting style. its like hairy said 1 maneuver. its like saying my style is left turning.

and usually people who reduce themself to 1 maneuver only (which also needs the alt advantage to begin with) are usually clueless when it comes to air combat.

It's only Hairy who thinks energy fighting is one style....but this comes from someone who thinks flailing around like a wounded butterfly in his 190 is before entering a high speed stall and being killed is cool_TM

August 13, 2015

And if they get bored... Well, they get bored...

Yes indeed, I will add though its not necessarily 9K it just higher than the highest bandit I can't vote up your post...I ran out for the day!

lol at the people who still think boom and zoomn is a fighting style. its like hairy said 1 maneuver. its like saying my style is left turning. and usually people who reduce themself to 1 maneuver only (which also needs the alt advantage to begin with) are usually clueless when it comes to air combat.

People really are not getting the point, yes there are many fighting styles and a fair few ACM's. The main point I have tried unsuccessfully to get across is to get into a turn and burn, low level fight with a superior turning aircraft that retains better energy in those turns is just bonkers. It's surely about flying to the advantage of each aircraft?

August 13, 2015

It's only Hairy who thinks energy fighting is one style...

And now... BnZ = Energy Fighting, same thing ! As Dogfight = Turnfighting, same thing !

New record.

but this comes from someone who thinks flailing around like a wounded butterfly in his 190 is before entering a high speed stall and being killed is cool_TM

Do not take your case for a generality, thank you.

August 13, 2015

The only record is your ability to misunderstand virtually anything anyone says....keep crying it's fun though :D

August 13, 2015

August 13, 2015

109 pilots!

This is how you should fly your plane....it's all about the rhythm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCmPM7c0bzY

August 13, 2015

I don't think I've ever been higher than 5km in my 109, no fun up there. Plus you get contrails about that height that's saying "Oh hey look here I am"

Enter the battle area at 4.5km @ 500kph and you're good to go for any situation in a 109.

August 13, 2015

One of the things I love to do is take a turn fighter up at say 5 to 8 thousand feet and deal with a 109 diving on me.

It takes practice to watch when the 109 dives on you and then dive yourself at the 'right time'. Then as both of us are in a dive but I am slower I can turn my plane and the enemy will miss me. And if I do it right I turn again and get a shot at the 109. I am not that good of a fighter pilot but I have had lots of fun just training on this. Even if there are lots of people in a server I can usually get a match like this between just me and one 109. If another comes along it is time to boggy to same place safer.

August 13, 2015

lol at the people who still think boom and zoomn is a fighting style. its like hairy said 1 maneuver. its like saying my style is left turning.

and usually people who reduce themself to 1 maneuver only (which also needs the alt advantage to begin with) are usually clueless when it comes to air combat.

Once committed to an attack, fly in at full speed. After scoring crippling or disabling hits, I would clear myself and then repeat the process. I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault. I always began my attacks from full strength, if possible, my ideal flying height being 22,000 ft because at that altitude I could best utilize the performance of my aircraft. Combat flying is based on the slashing attack and rough maneuvering. In combat flying, fancy precision aerobatic work is really not of much use. Instead, it is the rough maneuver which succeeds.

— Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF, aka Karaya One, the World's leading ace, with 352 victories in WWII Jagdgeschwader 52.

August 13, 2015

All the Erich Hartmann wannabes should read Hans Marseille's book. His aptness lied in his marksmanship and aggressiveness.

When comparing kills per engagement, Marseille was more efficient than Hartmann.

That said, anyone claiming that it is "sure death" to enter a dogfight in a 109 is flat out wrong and can claim ignorance at best.

Unsure of where this idea that dogfighting solely consists of out turning an enemy. That is like saying cooking only consists of a stove.

August 13, 2015

There was an post earlier in this thread that was like "I TO go into a fight, shoot down or get killed, I don't bother landing"... It's like "i love skydiving and I don't care using the parachute".

August 13, 2015

everything is energy fighting.

hit and run group tactics were developed because war is a about attrition, nothing else.

and boom and zoom is as i and hairy said 1 maneuver only.

air combat is only about angles or position, thats all.

and the more heavy your plane the more position is 1st choice when choosing maneuvers.

air combat maneuvers are many and they will be used by every plane.

there are no B+Z planes, there are no turnfighters only fighters and targets.

in suggest reading shaws fighter combat and maneuvering then you will notice that this pseudo term boom and zoom is only a pc games invention

Edited August 13, 2015 by Lemsko

August 14, 2015

Once committed to an attack, fly in at full speed. After scoring crippling or disabling hits, I would clear myself and then repeat the process. I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault. I always began my attacks from full strength, if possible, my ideal flying height being 22,000 ft because at that altitude I could best utilize the performance of my aircraft. Combat flying is based on the slashing attack and rough maneuvering. In combat flying, fancy precision aerobatic work is really not of much use. Instead, it is the rough maneuver which succeeds.

— Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF, aka Karaya One, the World's leading ace, with 352 victories in WWII Jagdgeschwader 52.

"Rough Manuvering... "

What the hell is "rough" Manuvering?

Do I need a riding crop and a ball gag? (crosses fingers)

Edited August 14, 2015 by Xenunjeon88

August 14, 2015

you need to be unpredictable - that's what rough means and as I may ad come back alive if you value your life more than a statical kill. This is not granted in sims but it's crucial to aerial combat

i an Interview Galland was asked what he thought about his 100+ victories. he replied I was lucky. i could have been killed 100+ times. That's all there is to air combat. You attack and get attacked and you try to stay alive. It' s very simple unless you fly your sim like a gamer or if you're suicidal.

Edited August 14, 2015 by indiaciki

August 14, 2015

I agree with both sides, German planes are more capable than just hit and run, but in terms of safety vs kills, you'll certainly live longer with hit run tactics. (Which was kind of the point in attrition warfare.)

It does make German players really predictable though. I don't even look forward in a Russian aircraft anymore, I just open the cockpit the second I'm airborne and look straight back as I'm flying the entire time.

(half kidding, half sadly true)

Edited August 14, 2015 by Xenunjeon88

August 14, 2015

I was shot down twice in ROF flying a SPAD very high by an Albatros and a DR I simply because I didn't see them coming until they were on my 6 and I had no clue. The tacitics aspect went missing in this discussion. You can't fight what you don't see.

August 14, 2015

I have twice had Reds have a verbal go at me when they get on my tail and I run. I do this because :

a.) I am not good at turnfighting

b) I am not (and my 109 is not) comfortable at turnfighting under the clouds and on the deck

c) I don't like having 20 yaks on my ass

d) I get tired of having to fly back to the objectives all night and get shot down.

I mean come on.... I have only been in flight sims at a serious level for around 3 years now and only now am I able to get 2-3 regular kills every time I fly but I still die a lot and thats especially when I try and turn with a skilled opponent. But whats really annoying is that red players are starting to voice their dislike because we won't turn and dogfight them?? WTF.... I must now hand myself on a silver plate and take a wrestler on at wrestling down and dirty at his own game when I am a stand-up boxer. Thats just stupid.

I know I should be ignoring taunts like that but it seems to be a growing trend that red pilots are frustrated with the high altitude tactics of the LW pilots. As far as I am concerned I treat this game like a real life situation..... stay alive at all costs. Don't engage unless you have a completely superior advantage.

Solution : LW needs captured yaks to also be able to furball on the deck?

That is a good attitude to have... The reality is it is your world.. do what floats your boat. I would rather run and limp home rather than get into a loosing fight because I chose to be target practice for someone else. The reality of the situation is that by doing so you are actually behaving more like the real pilots did ... I measure success in a mission first by:

My survival
The success of the mission ie.. did we hit the target? Did we loose any bombers? Did we stop the strike? etc etc..
Did my wingman make it back as well..

All the rest is for me a failed mission.

Getting shot down is what will make you better and prevent you from making the same mistake 2 times, we are playing SIM.

It's not like russian fighters are better down low or something, it's Stalingrad.

You can say whatever you want, i hate these guys, because every time i fly Germans and we lose the match, i know it's because of these guys that stay at 8000m the entire session, that compose the 3/4 of the team.

Don't say "i'm doing BnZ only, i engage only with altitude advantage, it's historical and correct" while staying at 8000m on eastern front.

Nonsense.. Learning the strengths and weaknesses of your aircraft (and your opponent's) and using them to your advantage will make you better. Anything else is just being a target drone.

BnZ can be done from any height advantage that allows you to disengage from the fight and regain your altitude advantage over your opponent. Speed is life in aerial combat, virtual or otherwise.. and since altitude can be exchanged for speed...

I think what Ze_Hairy is trying to say is that if you limit your flying techniques to only the ones your particular plane excel at you become an predictable opponent vulnerable to exploit. When you make contact with an enemy you evaluate the situation, energy states and relative aircraft performances and compare it to past experiences and make an decision on what the best way of action is. Sometimes you get stuck in a disadvantageous position and if you've spent most of your time fighting with huge energy advantages you won't have much past experience to compare the situation to.

I die a lot, but I like to think I become better with every death.

Anyway it's just a game, just have fun

.. but to do anything less is to play into your opponent's strengths.. You are either fighting to your strengths or your opponents..

Dieing .. even virtually is just not fun to me at all.

I think the lack of cover is not because people want to fly high alt, it is because very few want to fly cover!

I do, but..would always make sure I flew higher to aid spotting, and, oh my god, try and give an energy advantage on anyone attacking what I was escorting.

If you ask and receive an escort, they are really not going to fly much higher than you.

And I have done jabo in a 109, but the 250kg is not really worth it compared to the 190s 500kg. And again, when I've done jabo I will try to approach at 4000m or so (oh dear) to id the target and avoid tangling with the yaks on the deck before the target which would mean just discarding the bomb.

+1...

I think the debate on the tactics used in multiplayer dogfights is related more closely to that of strafing aircraft taking off in multiplayer, as it is more about the enjoyment the players get from their time with the game. It seems to me that most of the debate centers around one set of players getting annoyed at the tactics of BnZ players because, ultimately, it is less fun to play against a BnZ player.

We are, after all, here for entertainment (in one way or another). That entertainment is different for different people. For some, it is most enjoyable to be turning as hard as possible without stalling ("one inch from out of control"), trying to bring their guns onto a target that is fighting back. For others, it is the enjoyment that comes from engaging another human in a contest and surviving - which leads to the use of tactics that will result in perhaps fewer kills, but fewer deaths as well. I certainly fall into that category. In all of the multiplayer games and simulators I play, I try to stay alive as much as possible.

The tactics a simulator pilot uses (in IL2 BoS/BoM) versus what an actual combat pilot uses are going to be different. One risks at most his reputation, the other risks his life (and by extension, that of his friends through the ultimate outcome of the war in which he is fighting). This can be easily demonstrated with students of swordsmanship. Using a training sword, you might find a student being much more bold than when they train against a live blade. It is an incredibly eye-opening experience for students. They tend to, all of the sudden, second guess their tactics, measure (distancing), and footwork when a mistake may result in something much worse than a bruise. Though what they are doing is exactly the same as it was before, when they face a real blade, the way they go about things changes.

So I can see where pilots of world war II would have used the tactics that put them in the most advantageous position (such as only attacking when the risk was minimal). And for some of us, replicating their tactics in a simulator like IL2, is a way for us to connect to that moment in history, and pay homage to the pilots who shaped the outcome of the second world war.

I don't think we can complain about the way someone else is playing so long as they are not exploiting a bug or hacking.

That is often the issue.. because regardless to what people say about how "It was war and all was fair" and "Real pilots did the same thing.." etc etc etc.. the bottom line was ... In real life it was rare for a pilot to get the opportunity to hang out over an enemy base and vulch enemy pilots taking off.. It did happen if the opportunity arose but it was nowhere near as common as it is in the sim world.. Of course the fix is to load up flak at your base..

lol at the people who still think boom and zoomn is a fighting style. its like hairy said 1 maneuver. its like saying my style is left turning.

and usually people who reduce themself to 1 maneuver only (which also needs the alt advantage to begin with) are usually clueless when it comes to air combat.

It is a fighting style.. It just didn't work IRL quite the same way it works in the sim world.. but if you attack an enemy below you with a height advantage that you do not surrender.. whether you are at 7K or 2K .. it is part B&Z fighting..

All the Erich Hartmann wannabes should read Hans Marseille's book. His aptness lied in his marksmanship and aggressiveness.

When comparing kills per engagement, Marseille was more efficient than Hartmann.

That said, anyone claiming that it is "sure death" to enter a dogfight in a 109 is flat out wrong and can claim ignorance at best.

Unsure of where this idea that dogfighting solely consists of out turning an enemy. That is like saying cooking only consists of a stove.

+1 and there is more to energy fighting than just B&Z. Even being able to retrain your energy over your opponent in a turn fight is a science unto itself.. one that I have unfortunately not yet mastered ..

August 14, 2015

Founder Posts: 13 Posted Yesterday, 23:14 All the Erich Hartmann wannabes should read Hans Marseille's book. His aptness lied in his marksmanship and aggressiveness

The problem is Marseille's died, Hartmann survived the war with a score that will never be matched. It is not about being a wannabe it is about flying an aircraft to it's best advantage. I don't understand why some people don't get this?

August 14, 2015

The problem is Marseille's died, Hartmann survived the war with a score that will never be matched. It is not about being a wannabe it is about flying an aircraft to it's best advantage. I don't understand why some people don't get this?

Died to engine failure, not enemy fire.

August 14, 2015

The problem is Marseille's died, Hartmann survived the war with a score that will never be matched. It is not about being a wannabe it is about flying an aircraft to it's best advantage. I don't understand why some people don't get this?

Died to an aircraft malfunction and nothing else....nice try though. And Marseille flew his aircraft to it's advantages and was more efficient than Hartmann. Your point is moot.

Edit: Not only that, Marseille died 3 years before the war ended and STILL had a better efficiency than Hartmann. What does that tell you?

Edited August 14, 2015 by Layin_Scunion

August 14, 2015

Marseille died in a botched bail out due to a technical problem with his new 109G, not in combat or because of damage sustained in combat.

Hartmann was just lucky to never get killed or maimed in one of his many forced landings due to collision damage suffered during attacks.

Neither of those two pilots were afraid of putting themselves in harms way one way or another. Hartmann was just incredibly lucky on more than one occasion.

August 14, 2015

dillon_biz' timestamp='1439532104' post='279000'] Died to engine failure, not enemy fire.

Dies to an aircraft malfunction and nothing else....nice try though.

Ehh........ yes I'm aware of that, "my point" is we will never know if he would have been the best because he died.

Marseille flew his aircraft to it's advantages and was more efficient than Hartmann. Your point is moot.

The moot point is yours, because we will never know if he would have been better than Hartmann.

August 14, 2015

Ehh........ yes I'm aware of that, "my point" is we will never know if he would have been the best because he died.

The moot point is yours, because we will never know if he would have been better than Hartmann.

Who says kill count makes Hartmann the best? Show me where it says Hartmann is "the best" German pilot? He had the highest kill count, mostly of which consisted of LaGG-3s.

He was shooting down LaGG-3's in 1944......an outdated aircraft pushed into service out of necessity. Hartmann was part of a turkey shoot. Good for him. He racked up a kill count because he could. That does everything but make him "the best." I've read his book. It was boring in my opinion. His actions as a pilot were barely brave for the most part.....his bravest actions were after he was caught and in a POW camp. While he was flying, he was mostly an extremely conservative pilot who whenever was engaged at a disadvantage, barely knew what to do until his dogfighting wingmen, save his ass. He never encountered a situation where he had to save himself without some sort of help from a wingman. Marseille did on numerous occasions. How does that compare? How can a pilot who you consider "the best" not be able to save his own ass? Once Hartmann racked up such a serious kill count, he basically had wingmen who were bodyguards.

Marseille was his own beast. He was a dogfighter who at some points told wingmen to "F*** off" and let him be to do his own thing.....Hartmann at some points begged his wingmen to help him.....

I've read through the entirety of Marseille's book. Never did he once ask for help from a wingman. If you want to call a pilot "the best" you must have something to back it up besides a kill count. Wilt Chamberlain is barely ever considered "the best" basketball player because he has scored the most points....a layman's term metaphor but relevant.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Layin_Scunion

August 14, 2015

It's close to imposible to really compare Hartmann and Marseille, because their flying style and their goals in combat were so markedly different.

Marseille was a fighter by heart, while Hartmann was a stalker and a merciless killer.

One claim that is often made (not saying that you are claiming this, Custard) is that Hartmanns approach was somehow 'safer' and less likely to get you killed. One look at just how many times Hartmann narrowly cheated death will tell you, that it simply was not so.

August 14, 2015

Who says kill count makes Hartmann the best?

Ok Layin' I really can't believe that you want to go down this route but fair enough. The Job of a fighter pilot is to gain air superiority by shooting down the enemy. The most effective "Ace" in history at doing that was Hartmann.

help from a wingman.

That is what wingmen are for, it's called a support mechanism.

As stated we will never know if Marseille would have surpassed Hartmann because he died. It seems without doubt that he was a master of high angle deflection shooting but I'm not comparing the "men" I'm comparing the outcome.

August 14, 2015

Ok Layin' I really can't believe that you want to go down this route but fair enough. The Job of a fighter pilot is to gain air superiority by shooting down the enemy. The most effective "Ace" in history at doing that was Hartmann.

Not necesarilly true. Shooting down enemy aircraft is nearly always secondary in a fighter pilots job. A fighter pilots job is to deny the enemy air space. A fighter pilot on escort duty who chases after a kill is compromising his mission. A fighter pilot on CAP who chases and shoots down a stricken aircraft heading for home is compromising his mission. A fighter pilot on a sweep mission attacking non-fighter aircraft is compromising his mission etc etc.

Hartmanns 'ambush and escape' style is great at shooting down planes, but horrible at denying the enemy air space. Pilots like him played exactly the kind of attrition warfare which Germany couldn't afford. That's why I say time and again, that as a tactical and strategic force, the Luftwaffe was one big, collossal failure in the East.

Kill count can be an effective way of determining the qualities of a fighter pilot, but you have to look at, how he achieves those kills.

August 14, 2015

Kill count can be an effective way of determining the qualities of a fighter pilot, but you have to look at, how he achieves those kills.

As I said Finkeren, I'm not comparing the Men just the results. There are so many "What If" scenarios but the most "effective" fighter pilot in history is Hartmann.

Who is the best pilot argument is something I wasn't referring too or wanted to engage in. I should have rephrased best with "effective" to avoid confusion...my bad.

Edited August 14, 2015 by JG5_Custard

August 14, 2015

Who is the best pilot argument is something I wasn't referring too or wanted to engage in. I should have rephrased best with "effective" to avoid confusion...my bad.

Again, I would claim, that being an "effective" fighter pilot isn't synonymous with shooting down lots of enemy aircraft. In my book an effective combat pilot is one who completes his mission objectives, which even for a fighter pilot is seldom simply "shoot down enemy aircraft".

But we're drifting so far off topic, that we better leave it here.

August 14, 2015

But we're drifting so far off topic, that we better leave it here.

I concur

August 14, 2015

I've seen servers where it was a rule, "No BnZ". Yep.

As for all the silly teenage wankery comparing Hartmman and Marseilles you might as well debate which car manufacturer is best, Ford or GM, by only looking at The Mustang and Corvette. It's painful to read. Let's just conveniently forget that those companies made millions of cars that existed just to get people from A to B and focus on the two most famous models right? Don't be a clown, look at the bigger picture. Tactical doctrines aren't designed for people with the skill to make their own rules like Hartmann and Marseilles, they are developed for the safety and longevity of the average plodder and aimed at giving them the best chance to succeed. Leutnant/Leitenant "Unknown Pilot" are the reason why any sensible air force preferred attacking from surprise and speeding away before the enemy could retaliate and that's what most aerial combat was, it is what is today and it is what it always will be.

Actions that incur damage to the enemy without risking your own assets are obviously to be preferred when available.

We have the good fortune to be able to take pointless risks but historically "Hit and Run" tactics meant that you had more pilots coming home from missions. Pilots who lost nothing by making a mistake because they can escaped and lived to tell about it. Mixing in a furball means you get a 50-50 outcome and more losses than if you sneak up behind the the guy and blow his head off. Also, let's not forget that people make their decisions based on how much fuel they have, how hard they have been working their engine, the weather, the tactical picture. I generally prefer to hunt the enemy down since it is safer and more efficient but I also enjoy the thrill of diving in and get my hands dirty in a good old fashioned brawl, but I'll do it on my terms, when I think it favours my side and when I have a good chance of winning. If I'm heavy with fuel, jumping into a fight that will turn against me since it's near an enemy field then going into a dogfight is only going to prove that I am incapable of making sensible decisions. Same thing for the other side, when I'm attacking a guy who is obviously aware of me and taking good evasive actions then I have to weigh my choices and decide if it is worth closing with him on more even terms for a better shot.

Long story short, do what works for you.

I swear, I'm getting too old to read through pages of people making idiotic demands to "Define" this or "Prove" the other... Seriously.

August 14, 2015

think what Ze_Hairy is trying to say is that if you limit your flying techniques to only the ones your particular plane excel at you become an predictable opponent vulnerable to exploit. When you make contact with an enemy you evaluate the situation, energy states and relative aircraft performances and compare it to past experiences and make an decision on what the best way of action is. Sometimes you get stuck in a disadvantageous position and if you've spent most of your time fighting with huge energy advantages you won't have much past experience to compare the situation to. I die a lot, but I like to think I become better with every death. Anyway it's just a game, just have fun

.. but to do anything less is to play into your opponent's strengths.. You are either fighting to your strengths or your opponents.. Dieing .. even virtually is just not fun to me at all.

Yes you always fly to your strengths but for example an Sopwith Camel pilot who never turns left because his planes turns better to the right will get easily exploited by an experienced pilot who flies using all the capabilities of the plane.

And of course I don't find death particularly entertaining per se, but the fights that put me under stress is the most enjoyable to me and also stays in my head the longest.

August 14, 2015

so why the accusations of limited combat ability?

"If you are seriously saying that the 109 is a match for a Yak, with pilots of the same skill level in a low level turning competition"

"but this comes from someone who thinks flailing around like a wounded butterfly in his 190 is before entering a high speed stall and being killed is cool"

"The main point I have tried unsuccessfully to get across is to get into a turn and burn, low level fight with a superior turning aircraft that retains better energy in those turns is just bonkers. It's surely about flying to the advantage of each aircraft?"

...

This is enough to show how they are clueless in ACM.

August 14, 2015

This is enough to show how they are clueless in ACM.

Hairy, I'm not going to resort to insulting you, but if you honestly believe that you can beat a pilot of then same skill level in a Yak and you in a 109 in an "on the deck" turn fest I wish you well.

** Disclaimer: I refer to the squad JG5 here, but these are my views not necessarily any other members **

No need for the disclaimer Chief what you said is pretty much spot on.

August 14, 2015

Aw Hairy,..you're funny, bless you.

Thank you.

Hairy, I'm not going to resort to insulting you, but if you honestly believe that you can beat a pilot of then same skill level in a Yak and you in a 109 in an "on the deck" turn fest I wish you well.

Reducing... the term "dogfight"... with its package of maneuvers of all sorts... to a ridiculous slow speed turnfight...

August 14, 2015

almost like warthunder forum

low speed turnfighting is so much more common in pc games then in real live.

you know there is no restart button in reality.

the whole concept to divide air combat into 2 extreme categories is like telling people there are only 2 colors in this world, black and white.

air combat is fluid and doesnt like absolute categories.

August 14, 2015

You guys fly as you like, if you enjoy crusing at 7k and "feeling all supportive" then thats what you should do.
Let me tell you a story from il-2 Cliffs of Dover.
Large campaings were arranged back then, my squad was often tasked with close escort of our bomber forces, often Stukas, we flew the BF110.
We would fly close with the Stukas.
Squads like JG5 and JG2 (dont know if these squads have migrated to BOS) - were tasked with protecting / aiding us in case we met contacts.
Now here is how they usually did this, they would fly around 5km above us WAY up there. Often they did not come down to assist before it was too late, resulting in huge losses to the bomber groups. And a whole lot of work for the few close escorts.
But hey, im sure you get some nice pictures at 7-8k.
Miss those old campaings.

August 14, 2015

Just a little anecdote of yesterday...

I was flying with a friend, we were both in Fw 190, with 500kg bomb, ready to attack a depot in the north.

We were flying below 2000m, and btw, no voice communication, only steam (because reasons).

In the way, the radio said that a close position was attacked by Russians, my friend said "must be some IL-2s, let's check while keeping our bombs".

We have not even reached the position that we got attacked by two Yak-1 that came from above, followed by 2 others Yak-1 and a LaGG-3... Was a 2 vs 5.

Result ? We managed to kill 3 of them, i got shot down (crashed after my left aileron got jammed), and my friend has been able to leave the fight after i die.

OMG, how that can be possible ? yak-1 outurn fw 190 no ??))))))))

August 14, 2015

Reducing... the term "dogfight"... with its package of maneuvers of all sorts... to a ridiculous slow speed turnfight...

Oh lordy, you are not getting the point are you. I am not stupid and know there are a whole host of manoeuvres that can take place in air combat.

You guys fly as you like, if you enjoy crusing at 7k and "feeling all supportive" then thats what you should do.

I think what is rather ironic is that in last weeks Co-Op JG5 were not flying in the stratosphere and in fact got two VVS aircraft smoking good and proper, they were then "conveniently" finished off by other 109's.

August 14, 2015

I usually reply "I won't run if you don't turn." and then ignore the whiners.

Thats exactly what I always said in il21946 when I was always in my P51.

Many times against 109s.

Often when I lost the advantage in a fight I would just put the nose down and trim and extend. Often you would get comments like "come back and fight P51". I always replied like you, "I promise to not use my superior speed if you promise to not use your superior turn rate."

Always ended the discussion

August 14, 2015

low speed turnfighting is so much more common in pc games then in real live.

That unfortunately is what servers like WOL end up like as most are flying on the deck.

Take Note : Boom 'n Zoom is not allowed... you have to dogfight!

Recommended Posts

6./ZG26_Emil

6./ZG26_Custard

Dr_Molenbeek

6./ZG26_Emil

Jizzo

6./ZG26_Emil

[TWB]dillon_biz

Uriah

[KWN]T-oddball

Y29.Layin_Scunion

indiaciki

==LD==Lemsko

Xenunjeon88

indiaciki

Xenunjeon88

indiaciki

Bearcat

6./ZG26_Custard

[TWB]dillon_biz

Y29.Layin_Scunion

Finkeren

6./ZG26_Custard

Y29.Layin_Scunion

Finkeren

6./ZG26_Custard

Finkeren

6./ZG26_Custard

Finkeren

6./ZG26_Custard

Ace_Pilto

=LD=Penshoon

Dr_Molenbeek

6./ZG26_Custard

Dr_Molenbeek

==LD==Lemsko

Sunde

Dr_Molenbeek

6./ZG26_Custard

Kling

6./ZG26_Custard

Browse All

Activity