Jump to content
-332FG-Hank_DG

Real life ww2 vs game

Recommended Posts

On 9/20/2019 at 2:29 AM, -332FG-Hank_DG said:

If you could go back in time and be a ww2 pilot... how do you think you would fare after playing this game? Do you think you would have some advantage over some pilots? I understand this is just a game, but this is for fun. 


Perhaps some of you will enjoy this...not WWII related, but close enough. 
 

I had just graduated USAF pilot training and had received my assignment. I was at Laughlin’s base O Club celebrating when a new “casual Lt” (a Lt who hasn’t started pilot training, but also has no actual real world skills, so he sits around doing menial tasks all day until his training starts) approached me for advice. 
 

I could hardly get a word out before he launched into his story about how he had over 1,000 hours in Falcon 4.0 (or whatever version) and was a commander of some virtual squadron and knew the F-16 like the back of his hand already and on and on and on. 
 

Some of his classmates who were scheduled to start training with him in a few weeks walked away, others listened out of pity, while some others thought maybe he was on to something. 
 

So how’d he end up doing? I found out after leaving that he had washed out of pilot training after only a few weeks in T-6s. Somewhat sad, but when it’s an attitude problem (his flying was average apparently, which means pretty bad but not awful), I have less sympathy. 
 

That story was meant for entertainment purposes only (but yes it’s true). I’m sure some of you would do well, most would be average at best, and some would be terrible. Flight sims are a great intro to the fundamentals of flying, and are lots of fun too. The physiological factors and decision making required make the real thing a bit more challenging though! 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, III./SG77-G_Boelcke said:

Aerobatics is only for enemy already on your six, when you escape one another get you while you recover SA and stamina after all manouvering. I guess thrust on aerobatics is dead sentence.

It's for all kinds of manouvering, if you're doing a much higher speed and are trying to intercept a plane crossing your path and you know the angle is bad why turn into them when you can pull over the top and roll in?

it's about using your plane offensively as well as defensively.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 6:55 AM, 6FG_Big_Al said:

Assuming I was an average pilot who survived the war. I guess some things would be easier. For example (in theory) flight maneuvers, radio discipline and situational awareness. However, it would still be due to the implementation of the simulator (like Il-2), because here we personally have no G-forces and apart from VR/TrackIR and sound we have no further impressions of the plane. Or as some WW2 pilots described it, we can't "feel" the plane. This means that we are much more limited than in reality. (Apart from render distances)
But you don't have to go back that far. I think there are also some current amateur and fighter pilots here who might have similar experiences?

Disagree totally about the situational awareness thing. When I fly (a simple C150), I can spot planes that are far from me, no matter their current altitude. But in the game, you can be at my 12 o'clock and I still may fail to spot you. Spotting and having situational awareness in a game is 0% like in real life. That's just my IMO tho.

On 9/20/2019 at 7:37 AM, ITAF_Rani said:

Most of us will be scared and piss in their pants after first flights in these monstrous warbirds...

wut? piss in our pants? Man, flying a BF or a ME its like my wet dreams... which is not precisely piss in my pants, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 10:29 AM, -332FG-Hank_DG said:

If you could go back in time and be a ww2 pilot... how do you think you would fare after playing this game? Do you think you would have some advantage over some pilots? I understand this is just a game, but this is for fun. 

 

Definitely an advantage, over not just "some" but "most" pilots. Of course, it depends on the theater, nation, plane and year. Probably flying a P47 would be my personal choice for staying alive and winning medals. 

Yes I know the differences of real life flying (I've flown gliders myself), but you don't bomb thousands of moving trucks, shoot down thousands of planes, die thousands of times without learning anything. We learn how to kill and, more importantly, what kills us. In the sim we usually find ourselves in worst odds than real pilots had to deal with. The average multiplayer match is a slaughterhouse. And even in career mode, we're flying against Terminators which never stall, never tire and (mostly) never miss. In real life, we'd be A LOT more cautious, simply because we've been jumped from behind hundreds of times in our many sim lives. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you'd still have to go through flight school in order to not kill anyone the first time you taxi. Having gone through flight school (and passed), there'd be an advantage in terms of knowledge of the enemy material, gunnery and tactics. Flying, I'd say, not so much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd try to become a tactical advisor. Recruit some of the best pilots and teach them the science of air combat tactics. WWII Top Gun. That area has developed tremendously after WWII. I'd also try to get the message across to plane manufacturers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, cardboard_killer said:

Yeah, that and I get motion sickness when I even look at the ocean.

 

 

 

Wooof!

 

This is the right thread for someone to quote the average life expectancy of pilots. It varies a lot according to country, period etc,  but it could get quite hopeless in some situations. IIRC, heavy bomber crews suffered a 50% loss ratio or worse during the height of the war. I imagine sturmovik crews during 41 to 43 were provably very high. Heck, even the game career mode, which is far from a very accurate depiction of the actual thing, usually gets me killed by the 4th or 5th flight. 

 

If we all were real ww2 pilots we would have much better training an experience, and even so, within 6 months half of us or so would have already 'bought the farm'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JG27_PapaFly said:

I'd try to become a tactical advisor. Recruit some of the best pilots and teach them the science of air combat tactics. WWII Top Gun. That area has developed tremendously after WWII. I'd also try to get the message across to plane manufacturers.

 

There are better jobs, though:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, hrafnkolbrandr said:

I think a lot of the people here would do much better (comparatively) if they were transported to WW1 rather than WW2.

 

I know I would ! 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been through years of Air Force ROTC, taken flight lessons, gone on a few flights with some jet pilots who needed to get their hours in, and flown a couple of small prop aircraft. I've been through blinded "Recovery from irregular attitude" tests and flown some mild aerobatics. I've also flown flight simulators for about 2 decades now.

 

Considering that I am over 50 now and have to wear reading glasses to type this, I'd say I would do just as bad or worse than a pilot recruit if I was to actually have to fly a piston engine aircraft and do high G attack or defense maneuvers while tossing real ordnance around. Flying hot fighter aircraft is not an old guy's game. I don't think this simulator would help much except I could probably do a little better on instruments than the next guy.

Edited by Jaegermeister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
On 9/20/2019 at 11:54 PM, mazex said:

And everyone that have never held a real stick before would crash if trying to land. Period :)

 

 

 


Nope. There are enough accounts of passengers in planes with zero stick time who had to land the plane due to the pilot being incapacitated. :)

Edited by Uffz-Prien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Uffz-Prien said:


Nope. There are enough accounts of passengers in planes with zero stick time who had to land the plane due to the pilot being incapacitated. :)

 

How many of those have been unstable, high power aircraft? With no one on the ground helping? I’d wager none.  Remember the cub quote? “It’s the safest aircraft, it can only just kill you”. Many times in an aircraft things are ok right up to the exact moment they’re not, the design of the aircraft pretty much dictates how those situations end up.  WW2 aircraft are not designed to help you when it goes a bit wrong. I don’t think you can equate a few situations in basic trainers to sitting in a fighter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Uffz-Prien said:


Nope. There are enough accounts of passengers in planes with zero stick time who had to land the plane due to the pilot being incapacitated. :)

 

We are talking about landing a 109 or a Spitfire that are about a hard to land as you can get. Not a Cessna 172. After 600+ hours in light aircraft I would guess that I would have less than 20% chance to successfully land a 109 if I was just put in one in the air as my experience is mainly in light aircraft with low wing loading. A 3+ tonne aircraft with less wing area than a 172, almost zero forward visibility in landing attitude and a very narrow landing gear is about a bad as it gets while landing. And you need to get in over the edge of the airfield at close to stall speed to be able to do some kind of a flare. And a plane that is not stalled while landing bounces. And managing the correct handling of a bounce to not end up bad, or some kind of a ground loop, is a lot about having a feeling for the aircraft at stall speed. And that is unfortunately the weakest side of flight simulators as the edge of the flight envelope flying that is crucial here is a combination of "butt feeling" and control feedback (stiffness, vibrations). 

 

Like I wrote in another thread here I once flew with a late war 109 pilot who said he was scared shitless every time landing the 109, and half of his friends where killed landing or taking off. So putting someone with zero hours of stick time in that is a 100% failure rate in my opinion. But maybe manage to survive the crash if that is what you mean. 

Edited by mazex
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mazex said:


We are talking about landing a 109 or a Spitfire that are about a hard to land as you can get. Not a Cessna 172. After 600+ hours in light aircraft I would guess that I would have less than 20% chance to successfully land a 109 if I was just put in one in the air as my experience is mainly in light aircraft with low wing loading.

 

That cannot be right, you are being too modest. Many WW2 pilots transitioned directly to 109s and Spitfires from much less time than you have, in trainers that were also much lighter and more stable aircraft.  While they certainly wrote off lots of 109s and Spitfires in accidents, no way could it have been in 80% of the landings. More like 2-3%: still enough to kill a percentage of every course, but if you follow the procedures it was not that bad. (109s significantly worse than Spitfires, I am sure). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as I never have to land a Pfalz DXII in real life I'll be happy 😬

 

In summation then I think the answer to the OP question is that 80% of us are old gits who's body's would probably break before the plane !

Edited by Zooropa_Fly
Stupidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, mazex said:

 

We are talking about landing a 109 or a Spitfire that are about a hard to land as you can get. Not a Cessna 172. After 600+ hours in light aircraft I would guess that I would have less than 20% chance to successfully land a 109 if I was just put in one in the air as my experience is mainly in light aircraft with low wing loading. A 3+ tonne aircraft with less wing area than a 172, almost zero forward visibility in landing attitude and a very narrow landing gear is about a bad as it gets while landing. And you need to get in over the edge of the airfield at close to stall speed to be able to do some kind of a flare. And a plane that is not stalled while landing bounces. And managing the correct handling of a bounce to not end up bad, or some kind of a ground loop, is a lot about having a feeling for the aircraft at stall speed. And that is unfortunately the weakest side of flight simulators as the edge of the flight envelope flying that is crucial here is a combination of "butt feeling" and control feedback (stiffness, vibrations). 

 

Like I wrote in another thread here I once flew with a late war 109 pilot who said he was scared shitless every time landing the 109, and half of his friends where killed landing or taking off. So putting someone with zero hours of stick time in that is a 100% failure rate in my opinion. But maybe manage to survive the crash if that is what you mean. 


Ah, ok. I thought you were talking in general. :)

In a 109 I'd be scared shitless I wouldn't survive the inevitable ground-loop; in a 190 I'd feel I had an outside chance of not breaking the plane. Would I try either for a bunch of money? It would have to be a massively greater amount in the 109. 😁

Edited by Uffz-Prien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Norway only 1% of the people applying for flight school actually become a fighter pilot. 

It would be less here since age is a issue.

there are some advantages flying sim, but they would not count when applying 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I flew fiftyseven missions over Europe during WW II and I feel like I remember a little of what I was taught. I’ve learned a lot of things from reading Johan Kylander’s book “In Pursuit” that I wish I had known way back then. I would have been a much more successful fighter pilot." ~Russell S. Kyler Captain USAAF  - taken from Introduction to "In Pursuit" 

 

 if a single quote by a single pilot can be of any indication, I would say those of us who would actually manage to go through the selection and training could have a bit better understanding of the air combat as a whole then other recruits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

 

That cannot be right, you are being too modest. Many WW2 pilots transitioned directly to 109s and Spitfires from much less time than you have, in trainers that were also much lighter and more stable aircraft.  While they certainly wrote off lots of 109s and Spitfires in accidents, no way could it have been in 80% of the landings. More like 2-3%: still enough to kill a percentage of every course, but if you follow the procedures it was not that bad. (109s significantly worse than Spitfires, I am sure). 

 

Mmm, I have flown the Tiger Moth that they started out with that is a nice and light aircraft. But then the allied pilots spent a LOT of time in Texans/Harvards before going to the Spitfire, and the German pilots in Ar-96 and similar. And the Ar 96B had a max takeoff weight of 1700kg, a V12 of 496Hp and about the same wing area as a 172 or Me 109. The Texan 2400 kg / 600 Hp. So after flying those for many months they got into the 109 / Spitfire. If I would get some days first in an AR 96 / Harvard I would feel a lot more confident trying to land a 109 or Spitfire. But I would be scared shitless anyway :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a summary of RAF fighter training times during the BoB:

 

 EFTS 50 hours  (Tiger Moths)
SFTS 100 hours (Advanced Trainers - later Hurricanes)
OTU 40 hours (fighters)

 

From this thread: https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/raf-pilot-training-hours-1940.25873/

 

So at times - probably for the GAF towards the end of the war - it would have looked much the same. But I take your point. I am scared shitless landing fighters in IL-2!  Oddly enough I find the 109 easier: but then I never lower full flaps....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d barf.

 

That is the first thing that came to mind and I am sure it is pretty accurate.  That is what comes with middle-age, less ability to tolerate all the G-forces and what not.

 

I would hope I would have great energy discipline after all these years of practice with BFM and ACM.  I think I could keep my cool under pressure as well, but man, no way to tell unless you are really in it.  Maybe it would wear on my nerves quickly after a sortie or two.

 

Ultimately, I think I would just get sick and be relegated to loading ammunition with the ground crew😁.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, cardboard_killer said:

I'd hazard to guess that the training time for LW pilots dropped dramatically from 1943 on. :)

 

Indeed that was the case:

 

image.thumb.png.2bb01382372f2bc4af1cd7112a50e202.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also hazard to guess that the quality control in 1944+ was much lower. I don't know how much of Germany a/c industry was made up of slave laborers (probably most of fascist Italy post 1943 production) but dispersing the industry as they did in 1943 would cause many problems. I would guess that production models of LW a/c in 1944+ were much more likely to fail than earlier models. Of course, the USSR had the same issues early in the war as they relocated factories and used more unskilled labor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With no real world flight experience I say, put me in a Cessna 172 and I'm confident that I get this thing down in one piece. Put me in a Nieupeurt N 11, and it will kill me in the first turn, not even thinking of getting this thing safe down. 

 

Well, and thinking of getting a 109 safe down to the ground, I guess that I would do better in an Space Shuttle, down from Orbit to Cape Canaveral. 

Both impossible for me with just flight sim experience. 

Edited by Blooddawn1942

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first questions would be „how i start the engine and where is my HOTAS“

 

No flightsim can simulate the flying of manouvering small planes.

As example, spinning ingame, easy - spinning in  Cessna 152 „ wow, what is going on here....“ (own experience)

 

And, not to forgett, to quote a retired A-10 Pilot fling this thing in LOMAC „dying is undermodelled!“

Edited by III/JG53Frankyboy
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 11:37 AM, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

I'm myopic and can touch type. You'll find me a long, long way from any combat areas. Probably hiding.

 

I'm also myopic and I know my nickname would be "friendly fire".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, I don't believe this game would not have helped me one bit, so far, with my (pretend) real-world-war-II carrier takeoffs and landings in the SBD.  Or F6F.

 

So far....
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would to better than an average pilot, as long as I'd receive regular training as anyone else, to get accustomed to my assigned aircraft.

Obviously that would be necessary to complete such training to learn the aircraft properly, since flight sims can only teach you so much, but once that's done I'm sure I'd do decently in combat. 

I think that, because besides flight sims I have decades of air combat research available to me today that wasn't available to a G.I Joe back in the day. So, with tons of theoretical knowledge and some training I'm hoping to do semi-decent at least. 

Chances are still that I'd just get bounced and dunked on my first sortie, but hey, that can happen to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer this question I only have to imagine how I'd "play" this sim if there was a gun pointed to my head which would trigger if I got my pilot killed in the sim.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Retrofly said:

refuse to go

Then you'll be branded LMF & cleaning toilets for the rest of the war!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

Then you'll be branded LMF & cleaning toilets for the rest of the war!

I dont mind what I do as long as I get to keep my feet on the ground! :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I'm sure has been stated many times before,

The what I or anyone else would do, goes right out of the window once you realise that there is no refly button, and the bullets etc start hitting your plane.

Or once you realise that you just ended someones life.

I am not a real world pilot, but I have enough knowledge to know what I should do.

But when the dung hits the fan I might very well end up like a 1945 newby and jump out of the plane at the sight of the enemy... or just freeze up.

On Youtube there is a video showing someone without flying experience landing some commercial plane.. in a simulator... with an instructor behind them..... and thus claiming that anyone can land a commercial jet plane :dash:

The answer is sure you can if you have zero consequences, no real flying environment etc and so can remain calm etc......
 



If people want to experience a version of how they would have gone in ww2 etc, than as soon as they die,

Uninstall the game and never play it again since you are dead.

And see how everyone plays so much more over cautiously since "dying" now actually means something.
 

Edited by novicebutdeadly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CrazyDuck said:

To answer this question I only have to imagine how I'd "play" this sim if there was a gun pointed to my head which would trigger if I got my pilot killed in the sim.

 

That's how I played when closing in on 100 kills in Rise of Flight.  It's no fun.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hrafnkolbrandr said:

 

That's how I played when closing in on 100 kills in Rise of Flight.  It's no fun.

 

Wasn't a picnic for the rest of us either. 😜

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 6:50 PM, Feathered_IV said:

If I were in the RAF,  I would be great at parties.  I would run up such a mess bill that Britain would have to apply to the USA for aid.

If I were in the Luftwaffe, I would write long, loooong letters to Willy Messerschmitt all in big capital letters. Accusing him of Russian bias.

Darn, you're wasting your time on the German side.  I'd be living it up with nice French maidens and an easy life style on the Western Front instead of the cold and misery of the East that the Germans went through. 

 

On the other hand, flying for the VVS would be something with good de-icing drinks to boot and lovely things to chase on the ground.

 

As for in the air - no way would I be flying like I do in Il2, it would be like Iron Man but with no new career to start if you cop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...