PDA

View Full Version : did a 4 on 4 ace Vs ace KI c versus every combo



Gwalker70
03-16-2004, 05:18 PM
did a ace vs ace AI KIc versus every late war A/C the Ace Ki team won against every type .. it was TMO (total mad ownage) I felt sorry for the other AI pilots the AI KIc team mopped them up so badly it was like watching humans Vs AI they mopped up P51's P63's Dora's A9's La7's Yak 3's P38's 109k's ect ect altitude was tested at both 3k and 5k meters.. It was almost illegal how bad they won everytime.. hehe http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Gwalker70
03-16-2004, 05:18 PM
did a ace vs ace AI KIc versus every late war A/C the Ace Ki team won against every type .. it was TMO (total mad ownage) I felt sorry for the other AI pilots the AI KIc team mopped them up so badly it was like watching humans Vs AI they mopped up P51's P63's Dora's A9's La7's Yak 3's P38's 109k's ect ect altitude was tested at both 3k and 5k meters.. It was almost illegal how bad they won everytime.. hehe http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

El Turo
03-16-2004, 05:27 PM
The Ki-IL2 is a clown wagon.

Callsign "Turo" in IL2:FB & WWIIOL
______________________
Amidst morning clouds
Fork-tailed devil hunts its prey
Lightning strikes, süsse tr¤ume.

Gwalker70
03-16-2004, 05:30 PM
hehe I am going to start using that term "clown wagon" in HL whoever flies that thing.. by the way.. in HL say bye bye to the La7 so I guess all of our bitcing is for nothing.. all these azzpuppets turned in thier LA7's for Kic's

gates123
03-16-2004, 05:41 PM
It wouldnt be that bad if KI's actually went down after a couple 20mm's hits or a good second worth of 50cal. spray

El Turo
03-16-2004, 05:44 PM
Here is my Haiku from an earlier thread:

Invincible kite
Frank clown car eats twenty mike
like Cookie Monster

Callsign "Turo" in IL2:FB & WWIIOL
______________________
Amidst morning clouds
Fork-tailed devil hunts its prey
Lightning strikes, süsse tr¤ume.

SlickStick
03-16-2004, 07:02 PM
Ah, the V2.0 Ki-84-1c reminds me of the V1.0 Hurricanes. Except the Ki-84 is only just tweaked a "bit" on the high sides of its specifications for climb, speed, turn and e-retention. That Hurri MkIIc was about 4 years ahead of its time and with those 4 hispanos, mopped up everything until the first patch. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

"HL say bye bye to the La7 so I guess all of our bitcing is for nothing.. all these azzpuppets turned in thier LA7's for Kic's:

I have to admit, those cannons on the 1c make being a T and B fighter, almost easier than a B and Z fighter, but I only fly it for nostalgia's sake. It's like a limited time offer and I want to be a part of its patch history.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The difference between Ki V1.22 and V2.0 is quite interesting. The difference in the LA7, V1.22 to V2.0, really isn't more than a simple reduction of rudder effect and small reduction in speed/acceleration. She still turns wicked and does a great job in the vertical with a good zoom climb.

The La7 will always be the most balanced fighter in the game. Near the best in every category, as it was in real life. That my friends is not bias, but actual known-by-all specifications. Thank Lavochkin, for this magnificent design and Oleg for bringing it to life.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

___________________________
çk"*¯k 2004

http://imageshack.us/files/sigSpitIX.JPG
Coming Soon to a Six near you...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Weather_Man
03-16-2004, 07:07 PM
4 J8A kicked my butt every time. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

WUAF_Badsight
03-16-2004, 08:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:

The difference between Ki V1.22 and V2.0 is quite interesting. The difference in the LA7, V1.22 to V2.0, really isn't more than a simple reduction of rudder effect and small reduction in speed/acceleration. She still turns wicked and does a great job in the vertical with a good zoom climb. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i would take SlickSticks word on patch changes to the LA's as gospel

SlickStick
03-17-2004, 03:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Weather_Man:
4 J8A kicked my butt every time. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um, what did you do, try to out turn the 4 of them at the same time??? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

As slow as the J8A is, you should have climbed about 1000-2000m above them and just picked them off one-at-a-time. Even against the AI, this tactic should prove most useful against J8A.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

___________________________
çk"*¯k 2004

http://imageshack.us/files/sigSpitIX.JPG
Coming Soon to a Six near you...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

SKY_BOSS
03-17-2004, 04:15 PM
Clown Wagon. MaaaaaHaaaaaaHaaaaaHaaaaaa. Great name for that joke. Its a keeper. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://members.cox.net/ironwarlock/skynew.jpg

JG26Red
03-17-2004, 04:18 PM
The KI is simply overmoddeled in top speed, high speed handling and the durability of it... iam at a loss, i posted all these facts and oleg didnt answer and everyone called me a spammer.. lol, oh well, KI offically is the UFO of the game now...

Bull_dog_
03-17-2004, 05:34 PM
Ya know that Oleg fellow is one smart cookie...

It wouldn't suprise me if he modelled the Ki-84 after a Tie fighter just to get the heat off the La-7...it worked too!

In all seriousness "clown wagon" is very appropriate...I have been leaving servers lately cause too many Ki's...its just no fun anymore. You have to climb thousands of feet above them to gain a speed advantage and if you're lucky enough to catch one off guard your bullets bounce off!

The Ki-84 I read about growing up was the best plane Japan fielded. It was nimble and pretty fast for a Japanese plane, but top speed was still sub 400mph by my recollection. It was not heavily armored...better than a zero but far from a Fw or Hellcat. It had decent high altitude performance comparible to a hellcat but not as good as a Mustang or Jug. I really don't know much about low altitude things...

any Ki 84 experts who can correct my errors?

03-17-2004, 06:06 PM
Top speed doesn't mean anything much during a fight. The only instance where having a higher top speed shines, is when you have to run away.

Considerably, in a 1vs1 combat the acceleration rate is what matters way more than top speed - no matter how fast you are, it won't do much when you can't get to that speed.

The one true frightful aspect of the Ki-84 is not the maneuverability, not the rolls, not the durability and certainly not the firepower. It's the incredible acceleration rate that is so threatening.

And it should be.

Bull_dog_
03-17-2004, 07:25 PM
I agree with the acceleration piece in a dogfight...I remember reading a tread about combat speed vs. speed in non-combat... very good read.

I don't think US pilots did much dogfighting though and their aircraft aren't suited real well to it either... getting away is very important in real life and less so in the virtual world. On line in servers with maps that have bases a distance apart...I think speed plays an enormous role in survivability...climb, dive, shoot/kill, extend and climb again...top speed is important in that B&Z regime.

I find myself running from enemy aircraft often...that is why I like those historical servers. Getting run down by a La-7, Dora, 109K was no fun...but the Ki and 109Z is getting too much. You can't even get away from a Ki in a shallow dive in a P-47 or P-38 !!

Well enough about that subject... I don't like whining too much about planes that perform too well, but save it for those that don't perform to where they should be. Off line, I simply don't use the Ki-84 and on-line .... well I'm waiting for my favorite server to get AEP and I'm praying for no Ki's

Lifetaker999
03-17-2004, 07:29 PM
The KI-84 in this sim feels way uber when flown and flown against more than ANY other plane in the sim. Why is that? OVERMODELED. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

On second thought its DM might just be overmodeled. Unload a few 30mm in it and see what I mean.

BSS_CUDA
03-17-2004, 07:38 PM
I did some research online and found this page that has MANY ww2 fighter specs, inc the main IL2 one's. according to this page the KI is WAY Uber and over modeled also the 51 is undermodeled, the 109k seems to be about correct thohttp://www.acepilots.com/planes/specs.html I hope they fix this with the next patch, also the unexplained exploding 51's WTF with that

*****************************
BSS_CUDA
Co-Founder of my family
Black Sheep Tactical Officer

That was some of the best flying I've seen yet! right up to the part where you got killed.
you NEVER NEVER leave your wingman.

Jester : TopGun

WUAF_Badsight
03-17-2004, 08:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
the KI is WAY Uber <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

care to explain how ?

i hope you dont mean Top Speed

if you mean its turning , well do you have any data on its turn abilitys ?

El Turo
03-17-2004, 10:45 PM
How about: It eats bullets like tic-tacs.

Callsign "Turo" in IL2:FB & WWIIOL
______________________
Amidst morning clouds
Fork-tailed devil hunts its prey
Lightning strikes, süsse tr¤ume.

BSS_CUDA
03-18-2004, 07:51 AM
nah dont care about its turning, lotta planes will out turn it, the spit for one. I'm speaking about its climb, top speed and the DM, now this is compared to the 51 specs, but the 51 is 50 MPH faster than the KI but you will lose ground when chasing a KI. and the climb the KI being a MUCH lighter plane than the 51 only has a 100 FT/MIN climb advantage yet it will go straight up like a rocket and will out climb a 109k that has a 1200 FT/MIn climb advantage over it, WTF with that?
onto the DM, Japanese plane were notoriously light armoredand would burn at the slightest hit, yet the KI takes more damage than the IL2, personally I think the 51 is more undermodled than the KI is overmodeled except for the DM, even comparing the 51 to the 38, the 38 in the game is faster and will out climb the 51, but the specs say that shouldnt be so. there is a reason why all the noobs fly the KI, it is without a doubt the best plane in IL2. the specs call it a liar tho http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/smileys-gun2.gif

*****************************
BSS_CUDA
Co-Founder of my family
Black Sheep Tactical Officer

That was some of the best flying I've seen yet! right up to the part where you got killed.
you NEVER NEVER leave your wingman.

Jester : TopGun

LEXX_Luthor
03-18-2004, 08:32 AM
BSS_CUDA:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>now this is compared to the 51 specs, but the 51 is 50 MPH faster than the KI but you will lose ground when chasing a KI.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Try flying Ki~84 you will find it slower than P~51 all models at higher altitudes.

Are you dogfighting in the servers at sea level again?


__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

lrrp22
03-18-2004, 08:55 AM
Why not top speed, Badsight? You have been shown over and over that the game's 427 mph top speed is not representative of a wartime Ki-84. If the Frank was so blindingly fast, why did Iwo Jima-based 7th Fighter Command Mustang pilots claim a 40 mph speed advantage over the Ki-84?

How about the in-game Frank's high speed handling, do you claim that this is accurate as well?

For once, why don't you bring an argument as to why you think the Ki-84 is accurately modeled? So far your entire argument (or lack-there-of) seems to be based on the fact that you like the Frank the way it is currently modeled, accurate or not.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
the KI is WAY Uber <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

care to explain how ?

i hope you dont mean Top Speed

if you mean its turning , well do you have any data on its turn abilitys ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ZG77_Nagual
03-18-2004, 09:08 AM
Oleg used Japanese and American test data do model the Ki84. Obviously he cannot model manufacturing defects.

Personally I think the mustang is beautifully modeled.

I'd agree the ki seems a bit too sturdy, however it does have a few 'sweet spots'.

LEXX_Luthor
03-18-2004, 09:46 AM
In FB Ki~84 faster than P~51 only below about 2 or 3 km altitude.

Everybody is an Expert and Nobody noticed this. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

ZG77_Nagual
03-18-2004, 10:15 AM
S! Lexx_Luthor!
Nice

lrrp22
03-18-2004, 10:43 AM
Hi Nagual,

I don't think manufacturing defects *should* be modeled, but I do believe that performance should reflect wartime production-variant numbers. So far, I have seen nothing that supports the 427 mph figure for a wartime Ki-84. On the other hand, there seems to loads of data that support a top speed somewhere around 390 mph.

As far as the Mustang, it *is* well-modeled for a 67" HG WEP version. Unfortunately, the 67" max power setting seems to be a very rare setting for operational Mustangs. ETO Mustang's ran anywhere from 72" to 81" manifold pressure. The P-51D's that IJAAF Franks were facing over Japan were running at 80" WEP on 115/145 grade fuel and should be 30-40 mph faster below rated altitude than the P-51D's that we have in-game.

It seems only fair that if we are going to get optimistic (to say the least) flight models for many VVS and Japanese aircraft, that we should get flight models for American fighters that at least represent operational performance.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ZG77_Nagual:
Oleg used Japanese and American test data do model the Ki84. Obviously he cannot model manufacturing defects.

Personally I think the mustang is beautifully modeled.

I'd agree the ki seems a bit too sturdy, however it does have a few 'sweet spots'.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LEXX_Luthor
03-18-2004, 11:36 AM
You can't model manufacturing defects in late WAR because some campaigns and missions assume Germany or Japan win the WAR or at least delay the outcome till later (you know, Buck Rogers jets). Then Germany and Japan would not have the defects.



__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

ZG77_Nagual
03-18-2004, 11:43 AM
Irrp22 - have you contacted Oleg with data to back up your position? He's very cool about responding to well-documented input. I think solid documentation is the name of the game as as far as getting changes made.
As for vvs planes being overmodeled - my understanding is they're actually a little under-modeled. Based on what I've read it sure seems like the yak3 is. Regarding the P39 I think Oleg probably has access to more info on this plane than any of us! The Americans consider it an 'also-ran' and most sources all quote the same.

Anyway - I'd encourage you to email the beta addy with your findings.

lrrp22
03-18-2004, 12:13 PM
Nagual,

I am currently waitng for some documentation to arrive from the UK's Public Records Office that addresses the effects of increased boost on RAF Mustangs. I'll make sure that these documents find their way to Oleg.

While I can't speak to the Yak-3 or P-39 (they seem quite reasonable), the performance numbers for the FB La-7 seem to represent the very best numbers achieved by prototypes. Coupled with its seemingly incongruous energy modeling, the La-7's performance seems to fall firmly into the 'optimistic' category.

The Ki-84 also seems to feature very optimistic perfomance numbers and unlikely energy modeling yet suffers none of the types vices, such as weak airframe protection and poor high-speed handling.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ZG77_Nagual:
Irrp22 - have you contacted Oleg with data to back up your position? He's very cool about responding to well-documented input. I think solid documentation is the name of the game as as far as getting changes made.
As for vvs planes being overmodeled - my understanding is they're actually a little under-modeled. Based on what I've read it sure seems like the yak3 is. Regarding the P39 I think Oleg probably has access to more info on this plane than any of us! The Americans consider it an 'also-ran' and most sources all quote the same.

Anyway - I'd encourage you to email the beta addy with your findings.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

flyingskid2
03-18-2004, 12:39 PM
what are you guys complaining about? just fly the p-63c against the Ki. problem solved.

AtomicRunt
03-18-2004, 02:29 PM
Not saying its right but this is the first page I found on the Ki
http://www.wwiitech.net/main/japan/aircraft/ki-84/
heres another
http://www.aviationclassics.org.uk/frank.html
and...
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki84.html

Salute!
AB AtomicRunt
http://www.execulink.com/~jesten/LogoABS.jpg

BlitzPig_DDT
03-18-2004, 04:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:
The La7 will always be the most balanced fighter in the game. Near the best in every category, as it was in real life. That my friends is not bias, but actual known-by-all specifications. Thank Lavochkin, for this magnificent design and Oleg for bringing it to life.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, right......... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Aeroengineering is all about tradeoffs. Range, speed, agility, turn capability, VNE, acceleration, high altitude capability, low altitude capability, toughness, climb, etc.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. The 109 is built specifically for the climb, med-high alt performance, and the BnZ technique. It's specialized in those regimes. It had to sacrifice things to achieve this. It sacrificed turn, low level optimization, and range.

How can you claim that the soviets were able to break the laws of physics and specialize in all areas? (beating a specialized plane at it's own game, and in a seperate specialization category is just that)

Not saying it was, or should be "bad", just that one must account for what was sacrificed by specializing for low level operation and turn capability. Most VVS planes, Yak3 and La7 in particular, do not account for that. (and I do use those 2 planes. Don't come at me like I'm just attacking planes I don't like)

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

SlickStick
03-18-2004, 07:27 PM
Let me clarify my statement, which will help show the thought process behind it:

- I am comparing all online planes in FB through V1.22 to the La7 for basic speed, climb, acceleration, turn from 0-3000m, where most Online DFs in FB take place. I haven't flown enough AEP to include all AEP planes yet, but the La7 is only slightly less than V1.22 in speed, accel, e-retention and low-speed rudder effectiveness.

- The La7 is near the top in each of those categories listed for late-war planes, using the object viewer.

- In real life, it was at or near the exact same spot when compared to the same planes.

- I am most concerned with the game's online representation of the planes and that they are as close to what is actually available to the programmers to model the planes with, using the confines of currently available technology.

- I have flown the La series since Day 1 and like most others, have watched it change quite a few times since IL2, as all planes have.

- I'm using the experience of 394 1 vs 1 matches that pitted my La7 against all planes, against a semi-wide scale of pilot skills. Some big names stopped by, some big names in aliases stopped by, but the bottom line, I've learned exactly what the plane can and can't do against all of the other planes up to V1.22.

- I've only lost one of those 394 matches since IL2 and MAX LAG messages were prevalent half-way through the match, as it ended 4-3. Not a whine or complaint, just the facts.

- I only share my direct online experience playing the game and what I think about the La7's performance within the available planeset.

That is my experience with the La7 and this series of WWII combat simulation. The Ki in V2.0 is easily proven by someone who has a dual load of V1.22 and AEP going and can switch back and forth.

Set up a 1 vs 1 with a great La7 stick and fly the Ki using V2.0 online for awhile to ensure a good test base. Then, try the same thing using V1.22.

Now, you'll only have the ki-84-1a in V1.22, but they're all supposedly the same plane with different armaments, no? I'm not sure if the 1c should be or is heavier than the 1a, but fly the 1a in v2.0 and then the rest of the Kis against the La7.

I'm betting the difference in the Kis, V1.22 to V2.0, is far more noticeable than the difference between the La7s.

The V2.0 Ki climbs like a starved monkey up a banana tree, can catch P-51s and La7s on the deck and with those 30mm cannons of explosive shells, devestates anything it hits.

Robban75 is probably doing some kind of speed/climb tests with AEP as we speak. He's always good for shedding light on these types of discussions.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

___________________________
çk"*¯k 2004

http://imageshack.us/files/sigSpitIX.JPG
Coming Soon to a Six near you...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

WUAF_Badsight
03-18-2004, 08:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
Hi Nagual,

As far as the Mustang, it *is* well-modeled for a 67" HG WEP version. Unfortunately, the 67" max power setting seems to be a very rare setting for operational Mustangs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


thats because Oleg used Factory data rather than feild data



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Why not top speed, Badsight? You have been shown over and over that the game's 427 mph top speed is not representative of a wartime Ki-84.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


i havent been showen once that the KI is faster than the object viewer says

not once

VW-IceFire
03-18-2004, 08:12 PM
Another Ki-84 thread. I predict about 6-8 pages of arguments from this one, much like the last one. At least the attention is away from the La-7. If enough people stop flying the La-7 I may try flying it again, especially if AEP made it a bit more interesting to fly.

Even if its the best balanced WWII fighter, it should still be fun to fly. Maybe it has become that again. I should try it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

SlickStick
03-18-2004, 08:32 PM
I'm thinking V2.0's La7 has been patched down enough to make it an La7 WhineAce's plane now.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It has crossed that virtual line that makes it's public recognition of it's pilot's skills actually the man moving the machine.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

___________________________
çk"*¯k 2004

http://imageshack.us/files/sigSpitIX.JPG
Coming Soon to a Six near you...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

lrrp22
03-18-2004, 09:01 PM
Seems that only U.S. planes are hobbled by basic factory power settings.

The argument has never been that the Ki-84 was faster than the Object Viewer numbers, the argument has been that the OV is wrong for an operational Frank flown by the IJAAF.

Do you think it is fair that Russian and Japanese (and some German) aircraft should feature maximum possible power settings, operational or theoretical, yet U.S. a/c should be restricted to very conservative, frequently non-operational, factory settings?

Please respond with a reasoned argument and not another unsupported one-line quip.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
Hi Nagual,

As far as the Mustang, it *is* well-modeled for a 67" HG WEP version. Unfortunately, the 67" max power setting seems to be a very rare setting for operational Mustangs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


thats because Oleg used Factory data rather than feild data



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Why not top speed, Badsight? You have been shown over and over that the game's 427 mph top speed is not representative of a wartime Ki-84.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


i havent been showen once that the KI is faster than the object viewer says

not once<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WUAF_Badsight
03-18-2004, 09:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Do you think it is fair that Russian and Japanese (and some German) aircraft should feature maximum possible power settings, operational or theoretical, yet U.S. a/c should be restricted to very conservative, frequently non-operational, factory settings? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



ok even if a plane is true to the Object Viewer you still got to moan ?

you should realise that the mustang was moddeled to the best test data that oleg could find ..... are you not going to be happy till its better than it should ?

he specifically ignored a damming british test

dont forget that planes in FB are FACTORY FRESH

but wait ..... your precious Pony has a added stabiliser fillet to aid handeling

he also has posted that he used offical FW & Messerchmit factory data rather than tests without as good a results ?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Please respond with a reasoned argument and not another unsupported one-line quip. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


it took me one line to state that B4 ..... tell me what was "unsupported" about it ?



why dont you instead of posting here try doing some tests

the Pony will walk away from the Hayate over 7000 .... try it & you will see

im not one who believes that a plane should be a easy kill just because its japanese & that the Japanese were defeated by the americans during WW2

i dont buy the overmoddeled comments ..... they dont fit with what i see offline or online

lrrp22
03-18-2004, 11:02 PM
Whether or not the Frank's performance matches the OV is irrelevent if the OV is wrong.

"..... are you not going to be happy till its better than it should ?"

You're kidding, right? You are obviously *very* satisfied with the Frank being better than it should be. How do you explain the Ki-84's super high-speed handling? Show me *any* WWII fighter that exhibited outstanding turn performance at low speed AND high speed. You can't. The Spitfire didn't, the Yak-3 and La-7 didn't, and the Zero certainly didn't.

On the other hand, you are more than happy to limit the P-51 to performance numbers that simply do not represent the Mustang that Ki-84's faced over the Home Islands.

The Mustang in FB was modeled (quite well, I might add) to the readily available factory and USAAF spec's for 67" max boost pressure and is nowhere near the 'best' data. In fact, if the OV accurately reflects in-game performance, then the P-51C is substantially slower than base factory spec's.

The 'Precious' Pony features a fin fillet that was standard on all P-51D's after the initial P-51D-5-NA production block (less than 500) and was retrofitted to D-5-NA's still in service by late summer of '44.

I hope you are right about the Mustang walking away from the Frank over 7,000m, it should. It *should* walk away from the Ki-84 at pretty much any altitude.

"im not one who believes that a plane should be a easy kill just because its japanese & that the Japanese were defeated by the americans during WW2

i dont buy the overmoddeled comments ..... they dont fit with what i see offline or online"

Whether or not you *believe* that Japanese planes were easy to shoot down is irrelevant if contemporary data points to an unrealistic edge enjoyed by the Ki-84 in FB. You don't 'buy' the overmodeled comments because you *like* having a UFO Ki-84.

Nobody is claiming that the Frank should be *easy* to shoot down. That doesn't mean that unrealisic advantages should be overlooked.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Do you think it is fair that Russian and Japanese (and some German) aircraft should feature maximum possible power settings, operational or theoretical, yet U.S. a/c should be restricted to very conservative, frequently non-operational, factory settings? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



ok even if a plane is true to the Object Viewer you still got to moan ?

you should realise that the mustang was moddeled to the best test data that oleg could find ..... are you not going to be happy till its better than it should ?

he specifically ignored a damming british test

dont forget that planes in FB are _FACTORY FRESH_

but wait ..... your precious Pony has a added stabiliser fillet to aid handeling

he also has posted that he used offical FW & Messerchmit factory data rather than tests without as good a results ?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Please respond with a reasoned argument and not another unsupported one-line quip. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


it took me one line to state that B4 ..... tell me what was "_unsupported_" about it ?



why dont you instead of posting here try doing some tests

the Pony will walk away from the Hayate over 7000 .... try it & you will see

im not one who believes that a plane should be a easy kill just because its japanese & that the Japanese were defeated by the americans during WW2

i dont buy the overmoddeled comments ..... they dont fit with what i see offline or online<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WUAF_Badsight
03-18-2004, 11:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
How do you explain the Ki-84's super high-speed handling? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

do you even fly FB ?

LOADS of planes have awesome rudder/elevator authority at high speed

why single the Frank out ?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

On the other hand, you are more than happy to limit the P-51 to performance numbers that simply do not represent the Mustang that Ki-84's faced over the Home Islands. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thats because thats NOT the mustang in FB

its fresh from the factory

like ALL other FB planes ....... &lt;~~~ that was plain english but every time this discussion opens up you guys forget that fact

another thing is that i wanted the Pony faster as i couldnt get 700 out of it at 7600m like the OV says it can

well it does do 700 @ 7600 but only on the Crimea map

BUT

like the Hayate you have to overheat it to get it to do 700



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

You don't 'buy' the overmodeled comments because you *like* having a UFO Ki-84. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whatever ....

what im personally sick off is american plane fans bagging on jap planes

i think you either lack skill or want them easy prey

i dont fly the Hayate much as a fast roll rate puts me off

but if you look at the Hayates specs you see a plane on paper that would make mincemeat out of jugs & Ponys

FACT is that the Mustang was not a dominant fighter ..... it was suited to the roles it played

conversly the Hayate had AWESOME power loading

AWESOME wing loading specs

it had flaps designed for use in Combat turns

& reasonable drag CoE ...... it was not a crap plane

at higher ALT what gives good turn performance ? power loading & wing loading which the Hayate beats the mustang HANDS DOWN

online i hurt hayates .... they dont seem way too strong

if you fly one online you will see that yes it flys after wing hits ..... BUT NOT VERY WELL !

guess you actually have to have tried them to see

ALL planes in v2.0 seem harder to bring down

it seems Maddox games have increased the strength of all DM in this version

i see a great deal more new looking planes after they have received bursts than i ever did in FB v1.22

i realise the visible DM & the actual hits recieved are not linked but it seems even less linked than in FB v1.22

JG26Red
03-19-2004, 12:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
How do you explain the Ki-84's super high-speed handling? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

do you even fly FB ?

LOADS of planes have awesome rudder/elevator authority at high speed

why single the Frank out ?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

On the other hand, you are more than happy to limit the P-51 to performance numbers that simply do not represent the Mustang that Ki-84's faced over the Home Islands. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thats because thats NOT the mustang in FB

its fresh from the factory

like ALL other FB planes ....... &lt;~~~ that was plain english but every time this discussion opens up you guys forget that fact

another thing is that i wanted the Pony faster as i couldnt get 700 out of it at 7600m like the OV says it can

well it does do 700 @ 7600 but only on the Crimea map

BUT

like the Hayate you have to overheat it to get it to do 700



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

You don't 'buy' the overmodeled comments because you *like* having a UFO Ki-84. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whatever ....

what im personally sick off is american plane fans bagging on jap planes

i think you either lack skill or want them easy prey

i _dont_ fly the Hayate much as a fast roll rate puts me off

but if you look at the Hayates specs you see a plane on paper that would make mincemeat out of jugs & Ponys

FACT is that the Mustang was not a dominant fighter ..... it was suited to the roles it played

conversly the Hayate had AWESOME power loading

AWESOME wing loading specs

it had flaps designed for use in _Combat_ turns

& reasonable drag CoE ...... it was not a crap plane

at higher ALT what gives good turn performance ? power loading & wing loading which the Hayate beats the mustang HANDS DOWN

online i hurt hayates .... they dont seem way too strong

if you fly one online you will see that yes it flys after wing hits ..... BUT NOT VERY WELL !

guess you actually have to have tried them to see

_ALL_ planes in v2.0 seem harder to bring down

it seems Maddox games have increased the strength of all DM in this version

i see a great deal more new looking planes after they have received bursts than i ever did in FB v1.22

i realise the visible DM & the actual hits recieved are not linked but it seems even less linked than in FB v1.22<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

factory fresh? the jap factory fresh version of the ki didnt perform like the factory refurbed ki the us had after war... the issue here is oleg modelled the KI with a beefed up fuel and ignition system that it never saw in combat... I dont think any other planes are modeled in this fashion...

i would think you would model the plane as it was setup in combat, not some after the war super test to get everything you can get out of it... i would love to see that done to the A9 and D9 or even the P51 and 47s, as their engines are set at conservative settings... get my point? if your going to set one up to its ultimate performance, might as well do it for all...

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 03:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG26Red:

factory fresh? the jap factory fresh version of the ki didnt perform like the factory refurbed ki the us had after war... the issue here is oleg modelled the KI with a beefed up fuel and ignition system that it never saw in combat... I dont think any other planes are modeled in this fashion...

i would think you would model the plane as it was setup in combat, not some after the war super test to get everything you can get out of it... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you for real ?

the japanese had 100 octane during the war

just filling up on american gas doesnt give any benefit at all unless the motor is set to use it

do you realise that maddox games used japanese data as well ?

http://www.j-aircraft.org/bbs/army_config.pl?read=8899

In Response To: Here's the ball, Rick; run with it! (Jim Long)

Jim

You trying to get me in trouble? Warning -- read beyond this line only if you are open to new ideas and information!

The Japanese "official" maximum speed (624 kph) isn't really the Type 4 fighter's maximum speed comparable to max speeds published for Allied fighters. It was obtained at 2900 rpm and +150 boost. In this condition the Type 4 fighter could operate for an extended period and is more like a high speed cruise. At 3000 rpm and +200 boost the "max" speed was 650 kph or over 400 mph and this was far from the limit for the Type 4 fighter. We know this not only from captured techinical documents but from POWs. The US tests figures are quite close to the actual "real" max speed obtained by the Japanese.

The question about fuel implies that US (presumably 100 Octane) fuel would have made the Type 4 fighter faster. The Japanese got their performance (equal to that in US tests) using 92 octane fuel and methanol injection. The methanol injection plus type 92 fuel gave the desired anti-knock performance. There was no need to use 100 octane fuel.

Also hidden in the question is the myth that the Japanese did not have 100 octane fuel. They had it and used in captured aircraft that were optimized for its use and sometimes used in Japanese aircraft. The Japanese not only did octane additive research in the Homeland but captured refineries in the NEI capable of producing 1000s of tons of additives per month. In fact some type 92 fuel was produced as natural tops and some produced from lower grade fuels with additives. In addition to type 92 fuel the Japanese sometimes used type 95 fuel in the Type 4 fighter.

There is more to this story but I suspect this is "more than you really wanted to know" for many folks.

BlitzPig_DDT
03-19-2004, 07:18 AM
I don't see the big deal with the Ki-84. It's stall happy at low speed, even with combat flaps, and blackout happy at high speed.

The La7 is nearly the same speed, has nearly the same acceleration, and, from what I can tell, much better climb and MUCH better handling. I find the La7 to be far more deadly to use and dangerous to engage than the Ki-84.

That said, the La7 is not restricted to the laws of physics like the western planes are because it somehow manages to be as good as a specialist in absolutely every flight regime.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

El Turo
03-19-2004, 09:24 AM
When I get absolutely tired of pouring in my entire ammo load into a Ki-84 only to see it keep on trucking.. that's when I go clown-wagon hunting in a super-duper-uber-ride of my own. Hell, I intentionally RAMMED one after I used up all my 20mm and 50 cal ammo on it and it still didn't die.

I'll grab a LA7 3x20 and go a-hunting for some clown steak until they are all dead. I will intentionally leave 109s and 190s alone just so I can save my ammo and time for the Ki-84 1337 jocks.

I loathe the thing. I'd rather see the jets than the Ki-84 because at least they have a functioning damage model.

Callsign "Turo" in IL2:FB & WWIIOL
______________________
Amidst morning clouds
Fork-tailed devil hunts its prey
Lightning strikes, süsse tr¤ume.

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 10:20 AM
The Japanese *had* 100 octane fuel but all evidence indicates that it was very rare.

And please quit with the whole 'filling it up with US gas doesn't do anything' line. The Middleton example went far beyond just filling it with US gas.

It's obvious that you have a chip on your shoulder with regards to Japanese aircraft performance but the fact remains that the Frank was at best competitive with Mustang and was in no way dominant.

Just read some US pilot accounts of fighting the Frank, they respected it but knew full well that defeating it was simply a matter of keeping the fight fast. If it was such a dominant player, why did 7th Fighter Command pilots claim that it was 40 mph (*M*ph, not kph) slower than their Mustangs?

I'm sure the Frank made quite a splash when it made its debut in the CBI, but remember, its primary competition at the time was almost exclusively P-40N's.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG26Red:

factory fresh? the jap factory fresh version of the ki didnt perform like the factory refurbed ki the us had after war... the issue here is oleg modelled the KI with a beefed up fuel and ignition system that it never saw in combat... I dont think any other planes are modeled in this fashion...

i would think you would model the plane as it was setup in combat, not some after the war super test to get everything you can get out of it... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you for real ?

the japanese had 100 octane during the war

just filling up on american gas doesnt give any benefit at all unless the motor is set to use it

do you realise that maddox games used japanese data as well ?

http://www.j-aircraft.org/bbs/army_config.pl?read=8899

In Response To: Here's the ball, Rick; run with it! (Jim Long)

Jim

You trying to get me in trouble? Warning -- read beyond this line only if you are open to new ideas and information!

The Japanese "official" maximum speed (624 kph) isn't really the Type 4 fighter's maximum speed comparable to max speeds published for Allied fighters. It was obtained at 2900 rpm and +150 boost. In this condition the Type 4 fighter could operate for an extended period and is more like a high speed cruise. At 3000 rpm and +200 boost the "max" speed was 650 kph or over 400 mph and this was far from the limit for the Type 4 fighter. We know this not only from captured techinical documents but from POWs. The US tests figures are quite close to the actual "real" max speed obtained by the Japanese.

The question about fuel implies that US (presumably 100 Octane) fuel would have made the Type 4 fighter faster. The Japanese got their performance (equal to that in US tests) using 92 octane fuel and methanol injection. The methanol injection plus type 92 fuel gave the desired anti-knock performance. There was no need to use 100 octane fuel.

Also hidden in the question is the myth that the Japanese did not have 100 octane fuel. They had it and used in captured aircraft that were optimized for its use and sometimes used in Japanese aircraft. The Japanese not only did octane additive research in the Homeland but captured refineries in the NEI capable of producing 1000s of tons of additives per month. In fact some type 92 fuel was produced as natural tops and some produced from lower grade fuels with additives. In addition to type 92 fuel the Japanese sometimes used type 95 fuel in the Type 4 fighter.

There is more to this story but I suspect this is "more than you really wanted to know" for many folks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LEXX_Luthor
03-19-2004, 10:35 AM
Try this limited offwhine test...copy into mission folder file and run from FMB. Watch Ki~84, then try P~47 and some Fb109 and see the difference. You can zoom in and move the target fighter just a little to change the results but not much changes--although I only ran this test a few times. Let TB~3 AI nose gunner fire on target and watch from cockpit or target external.

By moving the second waypoint (or "waypoint 1") of the target fighter, you can change its takeoff direction. By clicking on the third waypoint (or "waypoint 2") you can change target plane type without running the risk of your mouse moving the second target waypoint and thus slightly changing the running of FB script (if that's how it works). oh, I have not tried it but you can take the gunner seat and fire yourself...


[MAIN]
MAP Net2Summer/load.ini
TIME 12.0
CloudType 0
CloudHeight 1500.0
player r0100
army 1
playerNum 0
[Wing]
g0100
r0100
[g0100]
Planes 1
Skill 1
Class air.KI_84_IB
Fuel 100
weapons default
[g0100_Way]
TAKEOFF 21690.81 29380.66 0 0
NORMFLY 40731.43 29440.00 500.00 300.00
NORMFLY 40777.14 20022.86 500.00 300.00
[r0100]
Planes 1
Skill 1
Class air.TB_3_4M_17
Fuel 100
weapons default
[r0100_Way]
TAKEOFF 21604.17 29381.15 0 0
NORMFLY 40016.18 29440.42 500.00 197.00
[NStationary]
[Buildings]
[Bridge]
[House]

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 10:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
The Japanese *had* 100 octane fuel but all evidence indicates that it was very rare.

And please quit with the whole 'filling it up with US gas doesn't do anything' line. The Middleton example went far beyond just filling it with US gas.

It's obvious that you have a chip on your shoulder with regards to Japanese aircraft performance but the fact remains that the Frank was at best competitive with Mustang and was in no way dominant.

Just read some US pilot accounts of fighting the Frank, they respected it but knew full well that defeating it was simply a matter of keeping the fight fast. If it was such a dominant player, why did 7th Fighter Command pilots claim that it was 40 mph (*M*ph, not kph) slower than their Mustangs?

I'm sure the Frank made quite a splash when it made its debut in the CBI, but remember, its primary competition at the time was almost exclusively P-40N's.

edit: Basically, my take on the Frank's performance is that it was slightly heavier, maybe slightly more powerful equivelant of the Spit LF IX or Mk VIII. A truly excellent fighter, but one that, like all others, traded performance in one flight regime to gain advantages in another.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG26Red:

factory fresh? the jap factory fresh version of the ki didnt perform like the factory refurbed ki the us had after war... the issue here is oleg modelled the KI with a beefed up fuel and ignition system that it never saw in combat... I dont think any other planes are modeled in this fashion...

i would think you would model the plane as it was setup in combat, not some after the war super test to get everything you can get out of it... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you for real ?

the japanese had 100 octane during the war

just filling up on american gas doesnt give any benefit at all unless the motor is set to use it

do you realise that maddox games used japanese data as well ?

http://www.j-aircraft.org/bbs/army_config.pl?read=8899

In Response To: Here's the ball, Rick; run with it! (Jim Long)

Jim

You trying to get me in trouble? Warning -- read beyond this line only if you are open to new ideas and information!

The Japanese "official" maximum speed (624 kph) isn't really the Type 4 fighter's maximum speed comparable to max speeds published for Allied fighters. It was obtained at 2900 rpm and +150 boost. In this condition the Type 4 fighter could operate for an extended period and is more like a high speed cruise. At 3000 rpm and +200 boost the "max" speed was 650 kph or over 400 mph and this was far from the limit for the Type 4 fighter. We know this not only from captured techinical documents but from POWs. The US tests figures are quite close to the actual "real" max speed obtained by the Japanese.

The question about fuel implies that US (presumably 100 Octane) fuel would have made the Type 4 fighter faster. The Japanese got their performance (equal to that in US tests) using 92 octane fuel and methanol injection. The methanol injection plus type 92 fuel gave the desired anti-knock performance. There was no need to use 100 octane fuel.

Also hidden in the question is the myth that the Japanese did not have 100 octane fuel. They had it and used in captured aircraft that were optimized for its use and sometimes used in Japanese aircraft. The Japanese not only did octane additive research in the Homeland but captured refineries in the NEI capable of producing 1000s of tons of additives per month. In fact some type 92 fuel was produced as natural tops and some produced from lower grade fuels with additives. In addition to type 92 fuel the Japanese sometimes used type 95 fuel in the Type 4 fighter.

There is more to this story but I suspect this is "more than you really wanted to know" for many folks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 11:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

but the fact remains that the Frank was at best competitive with Mustang and was in no way dominant.

Just read some US pilot accounts of fighting the Frank, they respected it but knew full well that defeating it was simply a matter of keeping the fight fast. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


plz tell me your joking ?

the ONLY way a pony could fight a hayate is by staying fast & running

there is NO WAy a Mustang could fight with a KI-84 on level terms

saying otherwise is a joke

the Hayate had total dogfighting performance dominance at Everything other than high alt speed

fantasy island is the only place where the reverse would be true

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 12:30 PM
No, FB is the only place where the Frank has dominance.

In *Real Life* the Mustang was faster at all altitudes, dove better, held energy better, and handled much better at higher speeds. Power loading was very close amongst operational variants, considering the fact that at 80" WEP boost pressure (standard in Iwo Jima's 7th Fighter Command) the Mustang's -7 Merlin was a 2,000 HP engine.

You are hooked on the Object Viewer numbers and in-game performance. Whether or not you want to admit it, these numbers do NOT represent the reality of combat in the Pacific.

Again, I will ask you to respond with specifics- not broad, unsupported generalizations and references to the OV.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

but the fact remains that the Frank was at best competitive with Mustang and was in no way dominant.

Just read some US pilot accounts of fighting the Frank, they respected it but knew full well that defeating it was simply a matter of keeping the fight fast. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


plz tell me your joking ?

the ONLY way a pony could fight a hayate is by staying fast & running

there is NO WAy a Mustang could fight with a KI-84 on level terms

saying otherwise is a joke

the Hayate had total dogfighting performance dominance at Everything other than high alt speed

fantasy island is the only place where the reverse would be true<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HarryVoyager
03-19-2004, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
In FB Ki~84 faster than P~51 only below about 2 or 3 km altitude.

Everybody is an Expert and Nobody noticed this. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have personally tested this, and found that at 7000m the Ki-84 is quite capable of maintaining a TAS of ~660-670 km/h, with the ability to quickly accellerate up to 690 in short bursts.

By contrast, the P-51D is only capable of maintaining 670-680 at that altitude, and does not have the capacity to accellerate up to 690.

I tested this for both aircraft with full amunition, 25% fuel, for a mid-air start at 7500m, with a number of different power and radiator settings, and I can email you the tracks, if you are so inclined. The first half of the Ki-84 track is a bit bumpy, as I had forgotten that the OOC altimiter was a radar altimiter, and not true altitude, so it also shows a couple of high speed turns, as I pointed the aircraft out to sea.

In short, the difference in their top sustainable speeds is so slight as to be completely meaningless.

Harry Voyager

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 02:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
In *Real Life* the Mustang was faster at all altitudes, dove better, held energy better, and handled much better at higher speeds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok again ..... in no way would the Pony ever been the better Dogfighter

speed was its only advantage ..... at higher alt at that

high speed elevator authority a better turner does not make

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 04:00 PM
Superior high speed elevator authority *does* make for a better high speed turner, how can you think it doesn't?

Those 80" manifolod pressure Mustangs over Japan would have been capable of 390+ mph (627 kph) at sea level, are you claiming that the Ki-84 was as fast? Even your much beloved Object Viewer quotes only 584 kph (363 mph), I believe.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
In *Real Life* the Mustang was faster at all altitudes, dove better, held energy better, and handled much better at higher speeds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok again ..... in no way would the Pony ever been the better Dogfighter

speed was its only advantage ..... at higher alt at that

high speed elevator authority a better turner does not make<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 04:05 PM
"much beloved"

lol your putting the KI down but its true to the Object Viewer

the problem is yours not mine

are you miffed because the Mustang isnt the uber end-of-war spec ?

its also true to the object viewer

I.E. factory specs like all other planes ..... except you got the stabiliser fillet on the pony as a feild mod

whining about the wrong plane dude

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 04:12 PM
Again, you're not addressing my points.

Are you disputing that the Mustang was an excellent high-speed turner? Do you think the Frank was capable of *more* than 584 kph at sea level?

I am not "putting down" the Ki-84, I am simply disputing the performance numbers quoted in the OV. We will never agree on the OV's information since you believe that it is representative of a wartime Ki-84 while I do not.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
"much beloved"

lol your putting the KI down but its true to the Object Viewer

the problem is yours not mine<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 04:28 PM
Field mod? No P-51D-5-NT or P-51D-20-NA, as featrued in FB, was ever delivered *without* the fin fillet. Period. As I have already told you, only the first 500 or 600 of the 9600 D/K's produced were delivered without the fin fillet.

As far as late war 'uber' modeling: I think your circa-1946, Middletown, PA Ki-84 wins that prize going away.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
"much beloved"

lol your putting the KI down but its true to the Object Viewer

the problem is yours not mine

are you miffed because the Mustang isnt the uber end-of-war spec ?

its also true to the object viewer

I.E. factory specs like all other planes ..... except you got the stabiliser fillet on the pony as a feild mod

whining about the wrong plane dude<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

S77th-Doofy
03-19-2004, 04:55 PM
LOL....
Just dont get infront of the guns. Fly smarter, and the Ki wont be a problem anymore wont it?

Its the pilot, not the plane!

I dont fly a Ki and I've never flown an LA. Most of the pilots that fly these planes dont concern me anyways.

Visit http://www.maddog-simulations.com home of the Savage 77th and =69th= bulldogs.
http://www.maddog-simulations.com/themes/fiblack/images/logo3.gif

crazyivan1970
03-19-2004, 04:56 PM
Doofy for president! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 05:00 PM
Doofy,

So your view is that accurate flight models are irrelevant?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S77th-Doofy:
LOL....
Just dont get infront of the guns. Fly smarter, and the Ki wont be a problem anymore wont it?

Its the pilot, not the plane!

I dont fly a Ki and I've never flown an LA. Most of the pilots that fly these planes dont concern me anyways.

Visit http://www.maddog-simulations.com home of the Savage 77th and =69th= bulldogs.
http://www.maddog-simulations.com/themes/fiblack/images/logo3.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 05:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
Doofy,

So your view is that accurate flight models are irrelevant? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so your view is correct is it ?

do you think that maddox games used that american test data only ?

you dont realise that Japanese KI actually could do that speed ?

you have yet to prove anything but only moan

EXAMPLE ??

you dont know what tests that Maddox games used as they have not said , but think that a KI could ony do FB speeds if it was "hotrodded"

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 05:49 PM
No, I don't 'realise' that Japanese Ki's could achieve those speeds. And to this point, *no one* has provided any kind of proof for those speeds other than the US test data. Can you?

On the other hand, top speeds of 388 to 392 mph for Japanese examples are thick on the ground.

Are you going to address the the whole "late war uber modeled' comment?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
Doofy,

So your view is that accurate flight models are irrelevant? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so your view is correct is it ?

do you think that maddox games used that american test data only ?

you dont realise that Japanese KI actually could do that speed ?

you have yet to prove anything but only moan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ZG77_Nagual
03-19-2004, 05:58 PM
As far as I know no japanese pilot every flew naked. Can you honestly say that about yourself?

The first Ki84s - that being the first few hundred - were absolutely stellar performers. You bet they were superior the pigs and pony's - no question - till you got up high anyway..
The American test was intended to find out what the ki would do relative to American planes - not race it at reno. I don't understand why it's so hard to accept the ki was a superior plane - before attrition ripped the QC out of japan's manufacturing. No doubt the ones most often encountered were of less high quality - and pilot quality was way down by '44 in Japan. But thorough research supports the KI being the better bird in terms of raw hardware. Personally I think it is better matched vs hellcats and late corsairs and p38Ls than mustangs and t-bolts.

All hail CrazyIvan - Arch-Guardian of The Norm and culler of the foul minded!

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 06:15 PM
I think the American test was more geared towards seeing what could be wrung out of the Frank under the best possible circumstances. I can't really believe that there was much official interest in an accurate comparison in 1946, it was totally irrlevant at that point.

Japanese metallurgy and QC was already pretty poor by mid 1944, as were their supplies of high quality fuel. Besides, early version or not, even the best numbers don't indicate any kind of dominance over the P-51, other than in a lower speed turning fight. The Mustang would still have enjoyed its typical high speed E-fighter advantages.

The T-bolt, on the other hand, would have had its hands full at the lower altitudes. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Oh, BTW, I'm naked right now... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ZG77_Nagual:
As far as I know no japanese pilot every flew naked. Can you honestly say that about yourself?

The first Ki84s - that being the first few hundred - were absolutely stellar performers. You bet they were superior the pigs and pony's - no question - till you got up high anyway..
The American test was intended to find out what the ki would do relative to American planes - not race it at reno. I don't understand why it's so hard to accept the ki was a superior plane - before attrition ripped the QC out of japan's manufacturing. No doubt the ones most often encountered were of less high quality - and pilot quality was way down by '44 in Japan. But thorough research supports the KI being the better bird in terms of raw hardware. Personally I think it is better matched vs hellcats and late corsairs and p38Ls than mustangs and t-bolts.

All hail CrazyIvan - Arch-Guardian of The Norm and culler of the foul minded!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lrrp22
03-19-2004, 06:17 PM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_redface.gifops:

crazyivan1970
03-19-2004, 06:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gwalker70:
did a ace vs ace AI KIc versus every late war A/C the Ace Ki team won against every type .. it was TMO (total mad ownage) I felt sorry for the other AI pilots the AI KIc team mopped them up so badly it was like watching humans Vs AI they mopped up P51's P63's Dora's A9's La7's Yak 3's P38's 109k's ect ect altitude was tested at both 3k and 5k meters.. It was almost illegal how bad they won everytime.. hehe http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Watch this movie...strongly recommended http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/fbstuff/klv_p38vski84.zip

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

Slammin_
03-19-2004, 06:55 PM
This thread needs to die.

WUAF_Badsight
03-19-2004, 07:55 PM
a horrible death

SlickStick
03-19-2004, 09:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:

Watch this movie...strongly recommended http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif

V!
Regards,

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um, I'm not sure what you're trying to show us there, Ivan, or how it relates to online Ki performance. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Indulge me if you will, as I attempt to explain what I saw. I saw a human P38 against 4 AI Kis, hopefully at least at Ace level.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

You set them to start at 1000m and proceeded to climb over them to about 2500m, while they just buzzed along oblivious at 1000m. Which AI do in a QMB until threatened.

Then, you used trim, flaps, and even that "quite uplifting" air brake, against AI that didn't even manage to pull the trigger against you the whole time. I'm thinking you could have used almost any plane and the results would've been about the same.

Hehe...

Now, show us an online track of you doing that to one or two human Ki Aces, let alone 4 and then we'll have something. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif

___________________________
çk"*¯k 2004

http://imageshack.us/files/sigSpitIX.JPG
Coming Soon to a Six near you...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif