PDA

View Full Version : Prospective US fliers, are you training Boom and Zoom?... - Cos' that is what you'll do.



Freycinet
08-24-2004, 08:36 AM
If you plan to fly US carrier-borne fighters I guess the best preparation for PF will be to fly P-47's against Yaks, I-16's and such planes.

It will be interesting to see noobs with no experience in flight sims or knowledge of the air war pick up PF in shops and then get a hammering from zeroes when they turn and burn with them. Will never happen to the select crowd who frequent these forums of course... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Freycinet
08-24-2004, 08:36 AM
If you plan to fly US carrier-borne fighters I guess the best preparation for PF will be to fly P-47's against Yaks, I-16's and such planes.

It will be interesting to see noobs with no experience in flight sims or knowledge of the air war pick up PF in shops and then get a hammering from zeroes when they turn and burn with them. Will never happen to the select crowd who frequent these forums of course... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-24-2004, 08:51 AM
not to forgett , the AI in game is more a "turning" one http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and you can practice vs real japanese , we have already a Zero in game http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif just for the damage modell.
using DB-3/IL4 as Betties will not give you a real feeling , they are way to tough http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif in comparison to the G4M

in VOW1 we had already some pacifik missions. was lawasy big fun. and frustrating if the allie pilots are aware of the B&Z , you could seldom set a hit on a well flown P-47/P-38 in your A6M5a. and vs Seafires (Spitfire LF.MkV) it was always fun - they still thought "i can turn with these japanese" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

CHDT
08-24-2004, 08:52 AM
.... and Focke Wulf 190 pilots will have a very good time in Corsair or Wildcat, of course if energy model is OK http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

JG53Frankyboy
08-24-2004, 08:59 AM
in general LW pilots should be more familiar with pacifik allie combat tactics and VVS pilots more familiar with the japanes ones http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

should all change sides http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

im still wondering if the japanes realy will get the "blue" color and the allies the "red" one http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif - VERY stange out there http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Chuck_Older
08-24-2004, 10:23 AM
I imagine that new players already try to turn fight Zeroes in P-47s...they're already in FB

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

geetarman
08-24-2004, 10:48 AM
This post is spot on! This board is going to fill up fast! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Read an interesting quote one time. John Meyer, ETO Mustang ace basically said, "I don't turn with enemy fighters. Maybe once only." Meaning, like, NEVER. Lol. Now how many Mustang jocks follow that advice in FB!?!

Tooz_69GIAP
08-24-2004, 10:51 AM
It is quite interesting that a good porton of US based LW fliers are planning on flying for the US in PF. Basically because the style of flying is pretty much the same for the LW and US aircraft in that energy tactics are the main focus rather than the russian and japanese emphasis on maneuvrability. I myself am leaning towards flying IJN mainly because there seems to be a lack of IJN squads appearing compared to Allied PF squads. Dunno though, coz I like bombers, and the A-20, B-25, Beaufighter, and others just are sweeet, hehe

whit ye looking at, ya big jessie?!?!

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_tooz.jpg (http://giap.webhop.info)
Executive Officer, 69th GIAP
Za Rodinu!
Petition to stop the M3 motorway through the Tara-Skryne Valley in Co. Meath, Ireland (http://www.petitiononline.com/hilltara/petition.html)

T_O_A_D
08-24-2004, 11:14 AM
I am a bit of a plane jumper. I go to the side of the server that has the least pilots. I'm sort of a Jack of all master of none. But given a choice I'll probably stay flying allied. Its my turn to have the B&Z plane and let the axis flyers deal with it. If I was an Axis flyer before I would remain and enjoy the full spectrum of this game.

Have you checked your Private Topics recently? (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=ugtpc&s=400102)
My TrackIR fix, Read the whole thread (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=49310655&m=15310285&p=1)
Commanding Officer of the 131st_VFW (http://www.geocities.com/vfw_131st/)
http://home.mchsi.com/~131st_vfw/T_O_A_D.jpg

CHDT
08-24-2004, 11:23 AM
Late-war Japanese aircrafts like the Shiden will bring also a very good balance and don't forget that aircrafts like the KI-44 or the Raiden are really not for turn and burners!

Personnally, I'm waiting for the Ki-100 which was probably the best pure dogfighter of the Pacific war.

Yellonet
08-24-2004, 11:38 AM
Yep, I'm gonna BnZ all of you in my B-25 (or my betty http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif). Guess if you'll be sweating when you got that 75mm on your tail! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v332/yellonet/Yellonet_sig.jpg

fordfan25
08-24-2004, 11:43 AM
from what iv read cant you dog fight a zero in a hellcat?

T_O_A_D
08-24-2004, 11:59 AM
Yep you just fly circles, absorb about 200 rounds and when he is out of bullets you run him down and shoot him http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
from what iv read cant you dog fight a zero in a hellcat?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you checked your Private Topics recently? (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=ugtpc&s=400102)
My TrackIR fix, Read the whole thread (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=49310655&m=15310285&p=1)
Commanding Officer of the 131st_VFW (http://www.geocities.com/vfw_131st/)
http://home.mchsi.com/~131st_vfw/T_O_A_D.jpg

VW-IceFire
08-24-2004, 03:11 PM
Nevermind US fliers...how about the Spitfire and Seafire. The Spitfire VIII in particular, very similar to the IX, a superb turn fighter against FW190's and Bf 109's...but against Zero's or even more to the point...the Oscar. Anyone turn fighting with a Spitfire against those is going to be toast.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"

Tater-SW-
08-24-2004, 04:15 PM
There are people who don't energy fight? &lt;G&gt;

tater

Fliger747
08-24-2004, 04:35 PM
Relative energy and manuverability of aircraft vary with altitude. At high altitude the Hellcat compared very well with the Zeke in manuverability and had superior diving properties. Besides sustained turn performance, instantaneous (roll) turn performance is an important attribute. Some aircraft such as the FW and the F4U were quite good at generating roll rates, quickly. This attribute gave an upper hand to the F86 in Korea over the Mig 15, which otherwise had a number of areas of superiority.

Tactics such as the 'barrel roll' attack, high and low yo-yo etc help the energy fighter against a superior manuvering foe.

For more than you ever wanted to know about this 'stuff', try Shaw's book 'Fighter Combat', Naval Inst. Press.

VFA-195 Snacky
08-24-2004, 04:41 PM
Hellcat was designed from the ground up to defeat the Zero. Unless it is totally porked in PF I am not worried about it. All of the American aircraft in AEP require energy tactics so why would PF be any different. Each server will be full of KI84Cs just like they are now anyway.lol

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."

Freycinet
08-24-2004, 05:01 PM
It's funny, but before the appearance of the american fighters in AEP, it seems to me that most US guys were flying Luftwaffe. I guess because the USSR has been a more recent foe than nazi germany. Anyway, it will stand them in good stead for the pacific air war, if (eh, sorry, WHEN) they choose to fly American...

Yes, shaws book is a TRULY exhaustive (& exhausting) read on the subject... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Copperhead310th
08-24-2004, 07:23 PM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Not me Freycinet
I started with the P-39 in IL-2.
Started a USAAF PTO Squadron in IL-2
with only p-39's. So i've been on the winning side all along. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://imageshack.us/files/copper%20sig%20with%20rank.jpg
310th FS & 380th BG website (http://www.310thVFS.com)

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-24-2004, 07:28 PM
Ofcoarse B&Z is there another way? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Flew the P-39 in original IL-2 and been flying the JUG since 1.0. So I should adapt rather well.

=S=

http://www.flightsuits.com/images/patches/patch_vmf214a.jpg
http://www.flightjournal.com/images/plane_profiles/corsair/c.jpg
www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

meh_cd
08-24-2004, 07:28 PM
Copperhead, what did your squadron fly in real life?

ImpStarDuece
08-24-2004, 09:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFA-195 Snacky:
Hellcat was designed from the ground up to defeat the Zero. Unless it is totally porked in PF I am not worried about it. All of the American aircraft in AEP require energy tactics so why would PF be any different. Each server will be full of KI84Cs just like they are now anyway.lol

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."



<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Every source i have EVER read states that the Hellcat was an evolutionary stepfoward from the Wildcat NOT a plane specifically designed to defeat the Zero, or any other Japanese fighter for that matter. I rather strongly disagree with you Snacky. Anyone expecting to be able to jump in a Hellcat and dominate over a well flown Zero is gonna get a rude shock.

As for B'n'Z; hasn't anyone heard of the FM3 'wilder' wildcat? This was an amazing performer in terms of wing loading and powerloading and is gonna give anyone down low a serious shock. These fierce, tough little birds may not have quite the horizontal manouverability of a Ki-43 or a Zero but they were damned fine at turn and burn, particularly at higher speeds.

Flying Bullet Magnet... Catching Lead Since 2002

"There's no such thing as gravity, the earth sucks!"

"War is just an extension of politics carried out by other means" von Clauswitz.

Fliger747
08-24-2004, 10:34 PM
OK, a slipped key stroke, but someone will jump on you for the FM2 Wildcat, the 'wilder Wildcat', a fine little bird gracing many of the escort carriers late in the war.

True enough that the F6F was designed before Koga's Zero was evaluated, but it can be said that it was designed to be an air superiority fighter against the then known qualities of it's primary opponent, the Zero. Originally it was powered by the R2800, but was only a so-so performer. Installation of the R2800 in the second prototype made all of the diffrence in the world.

The F6F was sucessfull against the Zero by being what it was not, and had to be flown with that in mind.

Many victories in the Pacific (on both sides) were 'won' in a single slashing attack from above as long operational distances necessitated economical (slow) cruise speeds, leaving the victims quite vunerable to an unseen enemy with a height advantage. Lots of puffy cummulus to hide behind as well!

Freycinet
08-25-2004, 03:29 AM
oh yes, the original il-2 p-39 crowd, ...forgot about you guys! - masters of the high-speed stall! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

WOLFMondo
08-25-2004, 03:50 AM
I've been practicing BnZ vs Ki's and Zero's for along time now in a P47.

What I really want to try is BnZ zero's in a Beaufighter. It won't work to well and it will probably lead to some online embarrisment but it has to be tried before it can be knocked!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Nevermind US fliers...how about the Spitfire and Seafire. The Spitfire VIII in particular, very similar to the IX, a superb turn fighter against FW190's and Bf 109's...but against Zero's or even more to the point...the Oscar. Anyone turn fighting with a Spitfire against those is going to be toast.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank Mr Mitchell that the Spitfire can BnZ just as well as turn fighthttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://bill.nickdafish.com/sig/mondo.jpg
Wolfgaming.net. Where the Gameplay is teamplay (http://www.wolfgaming.net)
Home of WGNDedicated

VFA-195 Snacky
08-25-2004, 06:55 AM
You need to do a little more research then. The Hellcat was designed based on info comming back from the fleet about the A6M.
Did a Google, nothing special, and first hit I got was this.lol
http://www.angelfire.com/fm/compass/F6F.htm

"The F6F was ordered for the US Navy after the initial shock of Allied contact with superior Japanese fighters, particularly the Mitsubishi A6M Zero, during the first few months of the Pacific War. As a result of this experience of combat against higher-performance machines the Hellcat's specification required the most powerful engine available. The prototype X6F-1, a progression from the F4F Wildcat which was then the standard fighter of the Navy, was provided with a 1700hp Wright R-2600 engine, but a month later - on 26 June1942 - it was re-engined with a 2000hp Pratt and Whitney R-2800 (the birth of the F6F therefore coinciding almost exactly with the great carrier Battle of Midway, 4-6 June 1942, in which its predecessor - the Grumman F4F Wildcat - played a critical role).

Production F6F-3s made their first combat flights on 31 August and 1 September1943, from the carriers Yorktown (CV10), Essex (CV9) and the light carrier Independence. The Hellcat immediately outclassed its opponents, having higher speed and rate-of-climb, being rugged and well-armoured but at the same time very maneuverable for such a large machine, and carrying a heavy and effective armament of six 0.5-inch Browning machine-guns with a large ammunition supply. The arrival of the F6Fs in late 1943, combined with the deployment of the new Essex and Independence Class carriers, immediately gave the US Pacific Fleet air supremacy wherever the Fast Carrier Force operated."


btw- I can dominate Zeros all day long with the proper tactics in AEP right now. Nobody said anything about a Hellcat being able to out turn a zero, but it dominates in all other envelopes (climb,speed,dive,firepower,range,survivablity,etc )


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFA-195 Snacky:
Hellcat was designed from the ground up to defeat the Zero. Unless it is totally porked in PF I am not worried about it. All of the American aircraft in AEP require energy tactics so why would PF be any different. Each server will be full of KI84Cs just like they are now anyway.lol

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."



<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Every source i have EVER read states that the Hellcat was an evolutionary stepfoward from the Wildcat NOT a plane specifically designed to defeat the Zero, or any other Japanese fighter for that matter. I rather strongly disagree with you Snacky. Anyone expecting to be able to jump in a Hellcat and dominate over a well flown Zero is gonna get a rude shock.

As for B'n'Z; hasn't anyone heard of the FM3 'wilder' wildcat? This was an amazing performer in terms of wing loading and powerloading and is gonna give anyone down low a serious shock. These fierce, tough little birds may not have quite the horizontal manouverability of a Ki-43 or a Zero but they were damned fine at turn and burn, particularly at higher speeds.

Flying Bullet Magnet... Catching Lead Since 2002

"There's no such thing as gravity, the earth sucks!"

"War is just an extension of politics carried out by other means" von Clauswitz.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."

[This message was edited by VFA-195 Snacky on Wed August 25 2004 at 06:17 AM.]

[This message was edited by VFA-195 Snacky on Wed August 25 2004 at 06:22 AM.]

Tater-SW-
08-25-2004, 07:54 AM
The F6F was NOT designed to counter the zero, period. You could argue it was up-engined after the Kogo Zero, but that's about it. The contract with Grumman was signed 30 June, 1941 for Grumman to design a new fighter (specifically the XF6F-1 and XF6F-2, even the engines for these prototypes were explicit in the contract). The US had very little information about the Zero at that time (a few reports from the Naval Attaché to Japan, but his comments seemed to be completely ignored by the navy (his name escapes me, there's a long bit about it in Combined Fleet Decoded).

Anyway, the designed an evolutionary step from the F4F, the principal goal was to out perform THAT aircraft.

The Zero comes into play with the new engine after thr Kogo Zero was discovered a few days before XF6F-1 flew on the 26th of June, 1942. The XF6F-1 was re-engined with the PW R2800 and its name changed to XF6F-3, that was the only significant change in the design that was ordered the previous summer.

tater

VFA-195 Snacky
08-25-2004, 08:26 AM
lol

"The robust Hellcat was the primary U.S. carrier fighter of the last two years of the Second World War. Unlike many other famous combat aircraft, it was a simple airplane, simply developed, and was put into production after detailed comparison with what the U.S. Navy accurately perceived as its primary foe: the Mitsubishi A6M Type 00, the famous Zero. The capture of one of the nimble Japanese fighters intact in the Aleutians proved most fortuitous, and led to cancellation of early Hellcat prototypes powered with the Wright R-2600 engine. For the Hellcat existed for one reason and one reason only: to kill Zeroes. And it did so not by copying the agile dogfighter, but by using its potent engine and armament and sturdy airframe to outlast, outrun, outdive, and outslug its Japanese opponent."

source: http://www.flight-history.com/arch/showstory.php?contentID=62

This zero was captured in Chinese "Guilin" in August, 1942
http://www.geocities.co.jp/Colosseum/2610/zero_eb2.jpg

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."

[This message was edited by VFA-195 Snacky on Wed August 25 2004 at 07:37 AM.]

[This message was edited by VFA-195 Snacky on Wed August 25 2004 at 08:40 AM.]

VFA-195 Snacky
08-25-2004, 09:44 AM
I'm not trying to discredit you in any way (which seems to be popular around here these days, everyone seems to want to know more than the next guy) but I think your missing my point. Grumman had the A6M zero in mind when they built the F6F.
Perhaps I shouldn't have said it was built for the zero, because it was built for carrier use, but to suggest that the F6F was a natural progression without any thought of how it would perform against the Zero is ignorant. The zero had everything to do with the performance of the Hellcat.

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."

Tater-SW-
08-25-2004, 12:24 PM
No, they did not have the A6M in mind, they knew nothing about it at all. Again, the contract to build the 2 prototype XF6Fs was signed in the summer of 1941, before the war started, and before the US had any information at all about the Zero except for a sketchy account by the USN Attaché to Japan regarding a retractable gear, monowing carrier fighter, with hardly more detail than that (I have no idea if the Navy would have given this intel to BuAer since according to what I've read they ignored the account). The F6F was designed as a follow-on to the F4F, improving on the F4F in all ways. In point of fact, it was a back-up design in case the F4U didn't work out (which it didn't right away for CV ops).

The F6F was DESIGNED prior to the Navy knowing squat about the Zero. The prototype was built after the war started, and flew as designed. It was up-engined only after the first prototype flew on June 26th, 1942 (the Kogo Zero was downed on 3 June near Dutch Harbor, your picture is the second captured Zero). The up-engined version, the XF6F-3 flew July 22d, 1942, around a month from the flight of the XF6F-1---that flight determined that it wasn't quite as fast as the captured Zero at some altitudes, so they tried the PW R2800-10 in place of the Wright R2600-16.

tater

PS-the account you quote above is clearly wrong in that it states the prototype XF6F-1s were cancelled due to the Kogo Zero. This is obviously wrong since the XF6F-1 flew after the Kogo Zero was found. The second XF6F-1 was aslo built, but was re-engined and flew as a XF6F-3 (the fact that given a PW R2800-10 it WAS an XF6F-3 should tell you something, aside from the engine, they are nearly identical).

VFA-195 Snacky
08-25-2004, 06:17 PM
ok tater, whatever you say. I'm not going to sit here and argue about it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."

BfHeFwMe
08-25-2004, 06:37 PM
I don't think zooming was used much around Japanese planes throughout most of the war, bad idea to go verticle anywhere around or near them. More like attack and extend using team coverage.

JG7_Rall
08-26-2004, 02:04 PM
The Hellcat was NOT built from the ground up to counter the Zero. Sure, modifications were made after the Zero was more thoroughly evalutated but the plane was designed before we were so shocked by the zero. The US knew about the zero but stereotyped Japanese planes as inferior...and they learned their lesson. Some people made a website that said that the F6F was designed from the ground up to counter the zero and its been misquoted all over the internet for ages now. It's simply not the case.

http://home.comcast.net/~nate.r5388/16502.jpg
"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!
Flying online as Hutch51

necrobaron
08-26-2004, 02:22 PM
Are there any tutorials or resources that can help me with BnZ? I never have really been able to master it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

"Not all who wander are lost."

Sakai9745
08-26-2004, 04:17 PM
Hey ya, Neo. When I taught myself the ol' BnZ (I am a self-confessed turner http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif), I used the following scenario.


Set up a flight of four friendly B-17s at about 1000M. Choose your aircraft (P-38 was the one I used) and position yourself approx 1000M above and behind. Starting with rear aspect attacks, try to dive steeply on the target, aiming for an airspeed of approx 600 - 700 KPH (I use pitch and the occasional airbrake to control airspeed). Cut loose when you're close enough, then use the airbrake to pull out. Just as you're coming to level on the horizon, retract the airbrake and climb away. I've always considered it successful if I hit the target and managed to gain at least that original 1000M altitude advantage in the climbout.

On the second bomber, try head on diving attacks. The third and fourth, take 'em from the sides.

What this all did for me was to develop SA (figuring what angle to dive from) and deflection shooting, from which I understand is paramount to the BnZ. In this kind of fighting, you'll be lucky to have two seconds to get a shot off, afterwards, the enemy is well behind you. Energy management is somewhat less critical IMO; as long as you don't lose control or break up in the dive, have enough airspeed to escape, and don't stall out at the apex of the zoom, you've done fine.

Really hope this helps you out. Luck.

Regards,

Al - SF, Calif

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/artexpo/august2002_fellows.jpg

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

[This message was edited by Sakai9745 on Thu August 26 2004 at 03:33 PM.]

LuftLuver
08-26-2004, 07:42 PM
Dunno about the rest of these comments, but the Ki84c will destroy gameplay on each and every server that includes it.

The end.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
http://members.cox.net/kinetic/SigImages/tonystewartchevy.jpg
"All your road courses are belong to us."

necrobaron
08-27-2004, 01:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sakai9745:
Hey ya, Neo. When I taught myself the ol' BnZ (I am a self-confessed turner http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif), I used the following scenario.


Set up a flight of four friendly B-17s at about 1000M. Choose your aircraft (P-38 was the one I used) and position yourself approx 1000M above and behind. Starting with rear aspect attacks, try to dive steeply on the target, aiming for an airspeed of approx 600 - 700 KPH (I use pitch and the occasional airbrake to control airspeed). Cut loose when you're close enough, then use the airbrake to pull out. Just as you're coming to level on the horizon, retract the airbrake and climb away. I've always considered it successful if I hit the target and managed to gain at least that original 1000M altitude advantage in the climbout.

On the second bomber, try head on diving attacks. The third and fourth, take 'em from the sides.

What this all did for me was to develop SA (figuring what angle to dive from) and deflection shooting, from which I understand is paramount to the BnZ. In this kind of fighting, you'll be lucky to have two seconds to get a shot off, afterwards, the enemy is well behind you. Energy management is somewhat less critical IMO; as long as you don't lose control or break up in the dive, have enough airspeed to escape, and don't stall out at the apex of the zoom, you've done fine.

Really hope this helps you out. Luck.

Regards,

Al - SF, Calif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Thanks for the advice and encouragement,Sakai. I appreciate it and will try it out. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Does this method work for fighters too? Considering their smaller size and their unpredictable flight, I'd think hitting them would be nearly impossible. Any pointers?

"Not all who wander are lost."

Tater-SW-
08-27-2004, 09:59 AM
Bombers are best for practice because they squirm less. Another way is to use a flight of friendly aircraft to attack. Online, you have a chance of actually surprising someone, but the AI will always jink as soon as you pull the trigger, or get within some range. That's only if you are lucky enough to get an AI taregt that is chasing someone else, too, otherwise they turn into you as soon as you are within spotting range. In which case you can dive into a furball, and takle a snap shot at whatever is in front of you, then zoom.

A BnZ pass on an unaware enemy can be a high side attack, or you can dive a little below and behind and attack from the rear quarter and slightly below---the climbing attack puts you in the "zoom" phase even before you shoot, and drops your airspeed a little to control closure and give you more of a chance to aim. Vs a person instead of AI, this also puts you where they can't see you without doing a clearing turn. If the enemy turns on your pass, don't follow more than maybe a 1/4 turn or less, if you yank hard to pull lead on him, you'll blow all your E. That's what Zeros with superior planes attacking them will do to you---hard break turns, and see who is dumb enough to try and pull lead, blowing all their E.

To be more in synch with real USN tactics of the time, practice high, rear quarter attacks ("high-side attack") since that was their prefered method in training. I wonder if it was because you couldn't attack a towed target sleeve from dead 6 without hitting the plane pulling the target? Hmm.

tater

[This message was edited by Tater-SW- on Fri August 27 2004 at 10:08 PM.]

necrobaron
08-27-2004, 11:59 AM
Thanks to you also, Tater. Looks like I've got some practicing to do. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

"Not all who wander are lost."

Sakai9745
08-28-2004, 10:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by necrobaron:
Does this method work for fighters too? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As Tater put it, they'll squirm more. I didn't try my hand at BnZ vs. fighters until I got comfortable with bombers that shot back. Besides his excellent advice (I'm gonna try that attacking in the zoom thing http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), the only add on I can give is that there's a little more judgement involved in attacking the nimble fighters.

If the bandit maneuvers enough to where I believe that I'll burn off too much airspeed to follow - hence translating to dogfighting, I tend to just break off, continue the dive to keep my speed up, then zoom away and out of danger. Once at the apex, I'll level and do a quick 180 to get a tally on the bandit... see what he or she's up to and determine whether or not I can attempt a second pass. Like Tater said, firing in BnZ is more a snapshot opportunity. Expend anymore than a couple seconds squeezing the trigger is either wasting ammo, or no longer maintaining BnZ tactics.

Just came to me. When I learned ground attack, I slowed the sim to half normal speed to get a feel for it. This might work for you as well in developing the judgement for when to start firing on a target.

Best of luck. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/artexpo/august2002_fellows.jpg

Regards,

Al - SF, Calif

"Defense Dept regrets to inform you that your sons are dead cause they were stupid."

Atomic_Marten
08-30-2004, 01:14 AM
BnZ is not some scientific methode of attack or whatever. Once when diving, you just have to watch your speed, otherwise u might lose plane parts, and you MUST be able to shoot from a distance. At least 0.50. Never let anything slow you down if you miss repeat the procedure. And that is about it. I'd say the No#1 requirement for BnZ is very good gunnery skill.

Fly high http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/93.gif

WUAF_Badsight
08-30-2004, 02:58 AM
the only real skill in FB is shooting

DFing is instinct as is E fighting once your experienced

the only part of combat in FB that i see as requiring skill is the shooting / ping predicting

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Bearcat99
08-30-2004, 06:41 AM
I wonder if we will be able to drive low flying Zekes in the ground like some Corair piots used to do IRL without the damage model kicking in.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://www.tuskegeeairmen.org)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | Sturmovik Essentials (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=51910959) | MUDMOVERS (http://magnum-pc.netfirms.com/mudmovers/index.htm)

IMMERSION BABY!!

Tvrdi
08-30-2004, 07:14 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by LuftLuver:
Dunno about the rest of these comments, but the Ki84c will destroy gameplay on each and every server that includes it.

The end.
QUOTE]

like i said before i think Ki84c would be tuned down in PF (compared to Ki84c in AEP)....if not, its not a big prob to join a server without Ki84c....

jpatrick62
08-30-2004, 12:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fliger747:
Relative energy and manuverability of aircraft vary with altitude. At high altitude the Hellcat compared very well with the Zeke in manuverability and had superior diving properties. Besides sustained turn performance, instantaneous (roll) turn performance is an important attribute. Some aircraft such as the FW and the F4U were quite good at generating roll rates, quickly. This attribute gave an upper hand to the F86 in Korea over the Mig 15, which otherwise had a number of areas of superiority.

Tactics such as the 'barrel roll' attack, high and low yo-yo etc help the energy fighter against a superior manuvering foe.

For more than you ever wanted to know about this 'stuff', try Shaw's book 'Fighter Combat', Naval Inst. Press.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Finally - someone who doesn't just equate manuverability with low speed horizontal turning! You are absolutely right - and some would be surpised to hear that the F4U would make toast of any Zero trying to turn above 300 MPH with it - especially to the right.

Atomic_Marten
08-30-2004, 12:23 PM
JPatrick62 you said that in turn above 300mph Corsair will eventually shot down Zero, but I am not sure of that. No matter in which side Corsair turns. I think that Zero can always turn inside with lower speed forcing Corsair to lose advantage of high speed turning. But then again, I am not sure - physics are not amongst my favourite subjects.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/93.gif