Stop trying to climb away from A-20s in your 109s... it doesn't work!!

[Talon_]

3 hours ago, I./ZG1_Martijnvdm said:

Looks like it didn't work to nicely for you either... ?

 

I survived and the 109 didn't...

1 hour ago, ZachariasX said:

there is simply no way you get anywhere past nose up if you don't have the power to weight ratio of a Spitfire.

 

If you use 60" the A-20 has this power to weight ratio. 4400hp, weight is 14830lbs empty + fuel + crew.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, ZachariasX said:

No. You do that, you go up no further than vertical unless you have the power to weight ratio of a modern fighter jet.

 

For glider, you use about 3.5 g as well to make a remotely round looping. You'll be around 50 km/h at the top. Around 3 g it becomes significantly oval and you'll be very slow at the top. Below that you're just messing around. Even biplanes like the Bücker 131 require you to pull 3.5 g, of if you are alone and lightly loaded, you can go down to maybe 3 g. Still, you will be very slow then on top of the arc.

 

In both examples, you enter the loop around 180 to 200 km/h. At twice the speed for fast aircraft, you fly a much bigger loop with a much farther upward travel. there is simply no way you get anywhere past nose up if you don't have the power to weight ratio of a Spitfire. And even in those aircraft, I don't think that 2 g will bring you anywhere near a loop. You are very fast when entering a loop. 2 g is a very flat trajectory then. At 400 km/h and 2 g, you'll be doing a 1.2 km circle!

 

The AT-6 has 155 kts, 290 km/h speed for entering a loop. If you were to make a round loop (that is the purpose of the maneuver), you have most speed and therefore acelleration down low when entering and when exiting the loop. At 3.5 g pull you will make a loop with 185 m radius, meaning your aircraft is required to be fast enough to make it up vertical for about 370 m. If you were to pull 2 g, you get about 300 m radius, requiring you to cover 600 m vertical. It is fair to say that the AT-6 cannot do that. The Tempest V requieres roughly 600 km/h to enter a loop. Think of where you'd go if you pulled only 2 g.

 

For practical purposes, as the aircraft will slow down, upward travel will be reduced signifitcantly. Therefore you might say, of course, one doesn't have to make a round loop, just pulling gradually when the aircraft slows down. While you have some leeway to do that (and this will enable you to "flip" some planes), you will quickly face the situation of stalling out when trying to pull the aircraft around or the aircraft stopping and falling backward, maybe flipping over if you are far enough on the back. Or not. Sitting in an aircraft falling backwards I find a most uncomfortable situation, as you have to hold the controls centered with all your force. If the windforce moves them they might get torn off. You cannot count on being able to hold the controls of a large, multicrew aircraft that is falling backwards.

 

In this sim, there is no problems in stalling out an aircraft in the vertical, so you are encouraged to do so. Even with bombers. But in real life, you wouldn't.

 

You right . 

btw

One is sure in real life (war time ) proportion of accidents (stall,spin) to combat casualties was almost identical.  This happened even to experienced pilots. Where in the game  rarely ends that way. Question why ?  We accumulated so many hours that never make that fatal mistakes or stall /spin are to forgiving (who remember Fw190 spin during hard full  ) - meybe both 

 

 

[ZachariasX]

22 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

If you use 60" the A-20 has this power to weight ratio. 4400hp, weight is 14830lbs empty + fuel + crew.

Oh yesss! I have to try that as well. Man, never thought of doing that, but there‘s lots to be learned! ?

[Poochnboo]

12 hours ago, TG1_Nil said:

Any plane can do aerobatic because they fly the same way, same physics apply.

Tell me how many B-52's you have seen doing airbatics at airshows. You can't get into "any plane" and do airbatics. Many aren't designed for it and aren't stressed for it. There were a lot of A-20's built. They served both in the Med, Europe, and the Pacific. Never have I read of a single account of a Havoc dogfighting with '109's or Zero's. 

Look, I have no problem with the video. It looks as though that was fun and if I ever pick up Kuban and get that A-20, I'm gonna try that. But please don't confuse flying in a game to what happens in real life. And , boy! Those 109 pilots had to have really sucked if they couldn't outfly a bomber for Pete's sakes. That looked like a War Thunder moment.

14 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

Keep in mind that jettisoning payload to get away from imminent destruction is less of a loss than the whole plane and crew

And I wasn't talking about jettisoning the bomb load. I'm talking about the shackles breaking and the bombs ripping through the airplane and doing catastrophic damage. 

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

10 minutes ago, Poochnboo said:

And I wasn't talking about jettisoning the bomb load. I'm talking about the shackles breaking and the bombs ripping through the airplane and doing catastrophic damage. 

 

And I was talking about it being far more likely that a pilot would jettison the bomb load to prevent that kind of damage during heavy evasive maneuvers.  But... thanks for the telling-off anyway.

[Nil]

@Poochnboo B25 (I read b25 instead of b52) can do aerobatics, like all planes, but they might reach they G limitation stated on the plane handbook. But still they can like all planes. 

Now if you take a B25 and reinforce its structure to sustain higher Gs

30 minutes ago, Poochnboo said:

Those 109 pilots had to have really sucked if they couldn't outfly a bomber for Pete's sakes.

Of course, "These guys suck! I would do much better!"

By the way, you know what is the most important quality of a pilot? 

Humility.

 

Edited September 13, 2018 by TG1_Nil

[ZachariasX]

21 minutes ago, Poochnboo said:

Tell me how many B-52's you have seen doing airbatics at airshows.

 

One. Well, he was practising for the airshow. And it is disturbing. Especially the fact that they let this guy on the plane in the first place.

Spoiler

 

 

3 minutes ago, TG1_Nil said:

B25 can do aerobatics, like all planes, but they might reach they G limitation stated on the plane handbook.

No. No. Nononono. For several reasons. And it has been demonstrated in the vid above that this it is a BIG NO.

Edit: You do mean B52? B-25, a tad more maybe.

Edited September 13, 2018 by ZachariasX

[Nil]

15 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Edit: You do mean B52? B-25, a tad more maybe.

For whatever reason I do not know, I red B25 (maybe because of the hypothetic b25 flyable)...

Anyway that is funny how our brain trick us sometimes!

Edited September 13, 2018 by TG1_Nil

[Poochnboo]

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

Edit: You do mean B52? B-25, a tad more maybe.

Nope. I meant B-52 as an answer to the statement that ALL airplanes can do airbatics. However...(see film). 

 

3 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

But... thanks for the telling-off anyway.

Actually, I wasn't trying to tell you off. Sorry if it was taken that way. I was simply clarifying what I meant.

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

5 hours ago, Poochnboo said:

 

Actually, I wasn't trying to tell you off. Sorry if it was taken that way. I was simply clarifying what I meant.

Sorry here too.  I read too much into it. 

 

I do agree that the bomb shackles - while quite strong, would break after a certain G limit causing catastrophic damage.  I also say that if a bomber pilot had to do excessive maneuvers to evade an enemy, they certainly would jettison the payload first.  Time effort and resources to build a plane and train a crew would be more costly, resource-wise and tactically, to lose than the bomb payload itself.   

[Talon_]

Weird that this is generating so much discussion yet nobody questions the JU88 (same size plane with a worse thrust:weight ratio) pulling these maneuvers... ?

[ZachariasX]

14 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

Weird that this is generating so much discussion yet nobody questions the JU88 (same size plane with a worse thrust:weight ratio) pulling these maneuvers... ?

THe Ju88 is a very good aircraft, like the Mosquito. It handles exceptionally well. Even Eric Brown was full of praise. "A delight to fly".

[Talon_]

1 hour ago, ZachariasX said:

THe Ju88 is a very good aircraft, like the Mosquito. It handles exceptionally well. Even Eric Brown was full of praise. "A delight to fly".

 

Right and this is an aircraft that weighs 50% more than an A-20 and makes very similar peak power.

[ZachariasX]

2 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Right and this is an aircraft that weighs 50% more than an A-20 and makes very similar peak power.

I would not know how readily you can loop an actual Ju-88, mostly due to stick force concerns. But it is a truly great aircraft.

[von_Tom]

I don't get the criticism of the 109 pilot.  How many of us have been hit by something we just didn't see, or from a long range "spray and pray" hit, or even (one of my last experiences) being sprayed by a 190 that looked to be stalling into the ground.

 

At the end of the day the 109 pilot hit a bomber, zoomed past and started a steep spiral climb to get another look at the original target.  That's pretty much what we'd all do.

 

von Tom

[DD_Arthur]

11 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

I do agree that the bomb shackles - while quite strong, would break after a certain G limit causing catastrophic damage.  I also say that if a bomber pilot had to do excessive maneuvers to evade an enemy, they certainly would jettison the payload first. 

 

Let me reiterate;  the corkscrew was the standard evasive manouevre to avoid nightfighters,  taught to all RAF bomber pilots. 

 If one of the gunners caught sight of an approaching nightfighter they would call corkscrew port - or starboard and the pilot would respond immediately.  These were night operations.  The gunners would only get a fleeting sight of an approaching nightfighter before it was upon them.  The was no time to open the bomb doors and ditch the load.  It was now or never.

[Ehret]

7 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

I would not know how readily you can loop an actual Ju-88, mostly due to stick force concerns. But it is a truly great aircraft.

 

Just checked the He-111 H-6 in the game - from level flight at 350km/h IAS I managed to do a loop, albeit just at top it stalled for a moment. Starting at 400km/h IAS it was possible to loop without stalling at all.

 

So, what the controversy is about?

[CUJO_1970]

11 hours ago, Talon_ said:

Weird that this is generating so much discussion yet nobody questions the JU88 (same size plane with a worse thrust:weight ratio) pulling these maneuvers... ?

 

Why would anyone question the Ju-88? It was built to be fully aerobatic, even being used as a fighter - along with the ability for dive bombing and the resultant pullouts.

 

At what point were the engines cleared for 60" on the A-20B?

[Talon_]

2 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

At what point were the engines cleared for 60" on the A-20B?

 

Never, sometimes to get the most out of your plane you have to throw the book away  

[CUJO_1970]

OK, so - gaming the game then.

 

Got it.

[Talon_]

2 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

OK, so - gaming the game then.

 

Got it.

 

They were cleared for over 54" though, and we don't actually know how much MAP they're making in 2nd gear. The needle stops at 50". It's perfectly possible that they're running at an allowable MAP for an A-20G.

[CUJO_1970]

18 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

They were cleared for over 54" though, and we don't actually know how much MAP they're making in 2nd gear. The needle stops at 50". It's perfectly possible that they're running at an allowable MAP for an A-20G.

 

We have A20B, not A20G.

 

The 2600 -11 powerplant has a 5-minute limit at 41".

[216th_Jordan]

On 9/13/2018 at 9:49 PM, Poochnboo said:

Tell me how many B-52's you have seen doing airbatics at airshows. You can't get into "any plane" and do airbatics. Many aren't designed for it and aren't stressed for it. There were a lot of A-20's built. They served both in the Med, Europe, and the Pacific. Never have I read of a single account of a Havoc dogfighting with '109's or Zero's. 

 

Because you are a bomber pilot and not crazy - you don't respawn. You could do a loop with a 747 if you would like to, given enough speed at the beginning, not a particularly nice one and if you fail to keep it in limits you'll just break it. while noone would ever risk it in the real word doesn't mean it is impossible.

 

Also this tragic incident shows what a normal passenger plane is capable of, does a split s.

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by 216th_Jordan

[Talon_]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

We have A20B, not A20G.

 

The 2600 -11 powerplant has a 5-minute limit at 41".

 

The Merlin 45 has 4 minutes at +12lbs and 3 minutes at +16lbs... engines last different amounts of times at different MAP.

[CUJO_1970]

9 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

The Merlin 45 has 4 minutes at +12lbs and 3 minutes at +16lbs... engines last different amounts of times at different MAP.

 

How long does the -11 powerplant last at 60" ?

[Talon_]

2 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

How long does the -11 powerplant last at 60" ?

 

About 45 seconds. Long enough to kill a fighter as long as you have good aim but not much more.

[CUJO_1970]

45 seconds sounds reasonable at 60", IMO.

 

 

[Garven]

Got my first nose guns kill with the A-20 tonight

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

10 hours ago, Garven_Dreis said:

Got my first nose guns kill with the A-20 tonight

 I had a great view of it at my 11 o'c. 

[Tony_Kito]

It's a well known fact that both the Peshka and the Boston can double up as heavy fighters that put the Bf-110 to shame ?

 

https://streamable.com/86zfg --> A-20 vs Ju-88

 

https://streamable.com/2hmcx --> A-20 vs Bf-110

 

https://streamable.com/o61mn --> Pe-2 vs Bf-109