PDA

View Full Version : Oleg- IJN Fighters too "Energy" oriented?



sugaki
03-31-2004, 01:17 PM
I've been playing the Zero in IL2 for awhile now, and it seems still to be more energy-fighting oriented then turn-fighting, which is contrary to how Japanese pilots fought with the plane. At mid-to-low speeds, where the plane is supposed to have a phenomenal turn-rate, it tends to fizzle very quickly. There's a good reason why U.S. pilots were instructed to not enter a low-speed turn battle with the A6M's, and the flight model doesn't seem to reflect that. I find myself still having to use energy tactics to win battles in the same way that I do with the Russian planes.

Also, planes seems a bit too spin-stall happy.

Preventing any flames, I'm not a newbie, and yes I use combat flaps, keep watch of the RPMs, and don't simply pull all the way back on the stick.

sugaki
03-31-2004, 01:17 PM
I've been playing the Zero in IL2 for awhile now, and it seems still to be more energy-fighting oriented then turn-fighting, which is contrary to how Japanese pilots fought with the plane. At mid-to-low speeds, where the plane is supposed to have a phenomenal turn-rate, it tends to fizzle very quickly. There's a good reason why U.S. pilots were instructed to not enter a low-speed turn battle with the A6M's, and the flight model doesn't seem to reflect that. I find myself still having to use energy tactics to win battles in the same way that I do with the Russian planes.

Also, planes seems a bit too spin-stall happy.

Preventing any flames, I'm not a newbie, and yes I use combat flaps, keep watch of the RPMs, and don't simply pull all the way back on the stick.

PikeBishop
04-01-2004, 03:29 AM
Hi,
The strengths and shortcomings of the Zero make it a great testbed of extremes. The power loadings accelleration and climb illustrate well what one can gain by saving weight....and also what you can lose. The Zero is OK in the game but I think it will be adjusted in future patches. I'm not sure if it accelerates fast enough, but climb seems OK I think that might be me as I assume that the climb and acceleration data are calculated from the same routines but I don't know. I think the A6M2 falls apart a bit too easily (I'm not speaking about a 3sec burst from a P47 here) against contemporary P40's P75's and Buffaloe's. But the P40 is the E version and not the B version. The A6M5 still has the same rate of roll (maybe even a bit worse) as the A6M2 and this will hopefully be corrected.

Best regards,

SLP

BBB_Hyperion
04-01-2004, 03:56 AM
Did you trimm it ?

A track would be helpfull.

Zero is one of the best turning monoplanes if not the best. It also keep E very well.

Noticed too the difference between stall and spin is not same since aep.

The turntime of the a6m5 is higher than that of the a6m2. Best turning is at 250 Tas at 1000 m with combat flaps at 17 s.

a6m2 240 tas 100 m combat < 16 s

Maybe helps a little.

Regards,
Hyperion

PBNA-Boosher
04-01-2004, 06:17 AM
I don't know what you're talking about really. The Zero is an excellent turn fighter. You probably have been dogfighting with it at 100% power. This is a no-no. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

In a dogfight in a zero, you must keep your throttle 85% at maximum. Remember that 85%-100% throttle is for evasion only, and even then that's overkill. All you really need to get away from your target are a couple of rolls and an quick immelman. They can't follow you that quickly. Combat flaps help too if you want to bleed a bit of E.

Just keep it below 85% and turnfight and you'll get so many kills hell won't even want you! (Of course, there's always the problem that a superior pilot in a P-40, P-38, etc... will come and B&Z, E fight, or just blow you to pieces with their best tactics. Unfortunately, since the A6M2 Zero has a low speed for the later war, you can no longer control the dogfight. However, you're still an enemy to be reckoned with.

As for Zeros being structurally stronger, I disagree. Aces like Pappy Boyington, Joe Foss, Marion Carl, and John Thatch stated that a Zero could be ripped apart with a short, less than 1/2 a second burst if placed right. And if the fuel tank was punctured, It was more than likely to explode. The Zero model in this game is very accurate. You just have to use it correctly.
It's the same way they treat the P-40, they just don't know how to fly it!

PikeBishop
04-01-2004, 07:05 AM
No No I'm talking from the point of view of shooting at them not being shot at. Because they do not duck and weave and pull up sharply and disappear well enough, I bearly hit the button and they fall apart.

regards

SLP

PikeBishop
04-01-2004, 07:14 AM
Also perhaps I'm missing something here........why not full throttle - I try to keep my speed and climbing ability available in the turn (or the immelman and for that you need to overcome the drag generated by the turn, so my speed stays more or less constant but I climb. If the speed starts to rise then I cut back on the throttle but not such that I am in danger of stalling out.
Please explain your strategy??

regards,

SLP Also remember that what Pappy said is anecdotal evidence although I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.

WWMaxGunz
04-01-2004, 09:43 AM
Every plane has a best sustained flat corner speed. It's about religion in serious combat sims for over a decade now to know those speeds by heart. You might go in fast but you either bleed down or you change direction slower.

Imagine a plane that can turn well extremely tight. Smaller radius, shorter distance to make a circle. With a high wingloaded plane you'd be wallowing and running a high induced drag where a lighter plane is cruising right along with a better AOA.

Now imagine the same plane with more power at full than it needs to run the best circle and speed. Give it more and the excess energy forces the circle wider unless the plane banks hard and starts pulling more AOA in a steep turn, which makes more induced drag in 2 ways (G's against the lift increases effective wingloading as well as steep bank turn and more elevator) fighting the centrifugal effect.

Gotta find tha groove!


Neal

sugaki
04-01-2004, 11:17 AM
I turn at 70-75% power most of the time, so it's not a matter of putting too much throttle in. But the game does seems to demand a mid-to-high top speed when entering the turn, thus having enough E to make turns without sputtering out.

This isn't a "make the Zero more powerful" thread, or "plane X is too good" (cough bitter Ki-84 haters), but the style IL2 seems to encourage is still energy-based for IJN planes, which loved horizontal fighting.

I'm happy with the A6M2 falling apart after a couple of shots, that's what it's supposed to do. Nor do I expect a higher top speed, or to beat P51's and P47's. I just want my turn battles, which is what the plane's made for, no matter how effective or ineffective it can be (especially against planes like F6F).

mike_espo
04-01-2004, 11:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sugaki:
I turn at 70-75% power most of the time, so it's not a matter of putting too much throttle in. But the game does seems to demand a mid-to-high top speed when entering the turn, thus having enough E to make turns without sputtering out.

This isn't a "make the Zero more powerful" thread, or "plane X is too good" (cough bitter Ki-84 haters), but the style IL2 seems to encourage is still energy-based for IJN planes, which loved horizontal fighting.

I'm happy with the A6M2 falling apart after a couple of shots, that's what it's supposed to do. Nor do I expect a higher top speed, or to beat P51's and P47's. I just want my turn battles, which is what the plane's made for, no matter how effective or ineffective it can be (especially against planes like F6F).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From what I have seen, no plane can turn with a zero. Whenever I get into a turn fight, I come out on top, unless a wingman zaps me from behind.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

The zero does have a problem with its max speed though. At 4500m it should do 530km/hr true. It only does 490km/hr true.

Hopefully it will be corrected in the patch.

"Fatte vede che ridemo!"http://www.flying-tigers.net/caccia%20WW%20II/g50.jpg

PikeBishop
04-01-2004, 11:28 AM
Precisely, one maintains the zero at about 200mph and climbs/turns until the speed begins to drop....then slacken off turn or push nose down a little until you can maintain an equilibrium - whichever is more suitable for the situation and eventually you will come around on the P40E's tail and above. The problem comes when the enemies flight envelope exceeds you own in most (it will never be all, in this case unless it was an apache helicopter) cases...then you are in trouble.

regards,

SLP

XyZspineZyX
04-01-2004, 10:49 PM
All I have to say is, if you want to see the Zero modelled properly, with all its plusses and minuses, you gotta try Target:Rabaul (http://www.targetware.net).

The P-40 vs. A6M2, F4F-vs.-A6M2, and Corsair vs. A6M3 are spookily similar to just what history says about these planes.

Over here, the P-40 can do nosestands due to the "moon gravity" and can preserve its energy far too well, so the Zeros have a tougher time of it than they should. Also, Zeros had very docile stalls, and didn't snap out of turns like they do here.

Korolov
04-02-2004, 10:40 AM
Maybe you should try getting some energy before climbing with a P-40 that just zoomed on you from 2k up, Stiglr. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

crazyivan1970
04-02-2004, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
All I have to say is, if you want to see the Zero modelled _properly,_ with all its plusses and minuses, you gotta try http://www.targetware.net.

The P-40 vs. A6M2, F4F-vs.-A6M2, and Corsair vs. A6M3 are spookily similar to just what history says about these planes.

Over here, the P-40 can do nosestands due to the "moon gravity" and can preserve its energy far too well, so the Zeros have a tougher time of it than they should. Also, Zeros had very docile stalls, and didn't snap out of turns like they do here.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know Stig, you really should try Battlefield1942, it`s FM for Zero is fenomenal...absolutely love it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Also, i am wondering...when are you going to stop advertizing this silly game of yours http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.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.

p1ngu666
04-02-2004, 11:42 AM
i tried it and the zero didnt seem that different to me. ugly tho :\

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
&lt;123_GWood_JG123&gt; NO SPAM!

WUAF_Badsight
04-02-2004, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:

Over here, the P-40 can do nosestands due to the "moon gravity" and can preserve its energy far too well, so the Zeros have a tougher time of it than they should. Also, Zeros had very docile stalls, and didn't snap out of turns like they do here.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok first of all the P-40 wasnt a pushover for the japanese pilots

those americans didnt just fly stright & level & let the japanese shoot them down

maybe the initial roll is too slow for the Zero to make the plane represent its slow roll rate but meh

if you know how to fly then the Zero can be made to out turn P-40s

if you know how to fly then you can fight against Zeros with the P-40

i dont think that Stigler knows how to play FB very well

XyZspineZyX
04-03-2004, 12:31 PM
First of all, Badsight, the P-40 WAS easy pickings for Zeros, *except* when the P-40s had altitude (and hence, energy). They didn't have that that often, if you read your history. When the P-40s *did* have alt, and that against Claudes and Nates and Oscars (which were misidentified by Flying Tiger pilots as "Zeros") and they had groups of Nells and Bettys to wade into, that's when they did well.

As for the Zero's roll rate, it's low *at speed*, just like everything about the plane gets sluggish. Your answer to the plane represents the sloppy modelling that's typical of IL-2: an anecdotal (or plain out biased) guess to produce a "kind of acceptable" result. That's the Zero FM in a nutshell.

I agree with you that if one knows how to fight his plane, and knows his opponent's, he can certainly handle most P-40s in a Zero. Where we disagree is whether this FM lets one properly experience that. It doesn't. P-40s get too many breaks courtesy of the flawed gravity and physics model.

WUAF_Badsight
04-03-2004, 01:30 PM
the P-40s lost out big time engaging in turn fights

THAT is what made them "easy pickings"

if they didnt do constant turns the Zero didnt have an easy time AT ALL

the Zeros advantage was in its ability to turn very tightly

it didnt roll faster than the P-40

it wasnt faster than the P-40

what bugs me is how heavy the Zero is even at low speeds

AND

its initial roll to 45 degrees inclination seems off too

it didnt have that sluggish rate of roll initially with those huge aeilerons surely

its overall roll rate is what the roll charts show is what my "guess" would be

mike_espo
04-03-2004, 01:37 PM
Its not the machine, its the man. True in RL and true in FB.

Stiglr: What the He** makes you such an expert on Japanese Aircraft???

"Fatte vede che ridemo!"http://www.flying-tigers.net/caccia%20WW%20II/g50.jpg

crazyivan1970
04-03-2004, 10:56 PM
Stay on the subject guys. Or start PT and you can use much heavier words http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.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.

PikeBishop
04-04-2004, 02:28 AM
Please note that was NOT just turning that gave the Zero the edge......it was that whilst turning it still had excesspower to accelerate Or climb. If the P40 pilot tried to chase a Zero in a turn, the Zero could still climb at 500 ft/min while pulling 2g at around 200mph.
To follow this turn as soon as the P40 started the turn his speed began to drop away towards the stall. There was no way he could climb as well because this would increase the speed loss leading to the stall even more quickly. SO he cannot bring his guns to bear on the target. The only thing to do would be to put the nose down to increase the speed but losing the advantage of height. Best dive out of the fight and pull out of the combat until the next time.
The only way to counter this advantage was to try to get above the Zeros undetected (a big if...) and dive onto them..bang away and pullup into a zoom for the next pass....which is effectively what they did if they could. But if the Zero's saw them first.....a different story.......

regards
SLP

sugaki
04-05-2004, 01:59 PM
This isn't meant to be a thread of P40's versus Zeros...

P40's had a slightly higher max speed, which can be used for zoom & booms. Problem is they tried engaging, which got them killed. Regardless, without altittude advantage P40's were in a difficult situation.

Nor am I talking about how good pilots fight as opposed to bad pilots. This thread isn't about the men, it's about the capabilities of the machine.

Now that that's cleared up, the A6M's energy bleeding is excessive in IL2 in turns, and is sluggish at lower speeds, which is contrary to what is reported in real life. Also, controls don't get sluggish enough in dives.

Saburo Sakai instructed Zero kamikaze pilots to fly low instead of diving into targets, because at high speeds the plane becomes virtually uncontrollable.

geetarman
04-05-2004, 02:13 PM
I'm with Boosher - the zero can out turn most planes in this game at low speed and with combat flaps.

It's amazing how many Mustang and Spit pilots go for the bait!

I think it's a great plane as is and fly it usually when I'm on blue.

WWMaxGunz
04-05-2004, 09:00 PM
On the AVG homepage the pilots there is a FAQ where it is stated that against Zeroes (those guys got moved to the Pac Theatre from China) the P-40 could outurn then in a dive that kept the speed high enough for the Zeroes to have a hard time turning. Thus they could get a lead for shots from above and make escapes as well.

www.flyingtigersavg.com (http://www.flyingtigersavg.com)

There's more than one way to skin a cat. The trick is to keep your hand and arm while doing it.


Neal

XyZspineZyX
04-05-2004, 10:10 PM
ero A6m2 is it's handling.
Drive it like a truck; Keep the gas at 2/3's max and back right off when entering a turn, accelerating on the way out. Keep to the turning limits
Don't use the rudder at any time.

Merlin_602Sqn
04-06-2004, 04:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>P-40s get too many breaks courtesy of the flawed gravity and physics model.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You obviously don't know much about physics either, gravitational forces are constant and there's only one way to model them.
Now add a few other constants like weight, wingarea(don't know another word for it), torque of the engine, lift, drag, etc., and you will have the way those forces impact the flight model.

http://www.cityofglasgow.btinternet.co.uk/images/Merlin-sig.jpg

[This message was edited by Merlin_602Sqn on Tue April 06 2004 at 09:30 AM.]

sugaki
04-07-2004, 06:03 PM
Sigh. My thread wasn't entitled "how do I fly a Zero," it's "IJN planes don't fly like they should."

While I value your tips for how to fly, I'm not a newbie at flying and do know that turning at full throttle makes you turn worse, pull too hard and you can stall, and that Zero has a lot of flaws including low top speed, vulnerability to gunfire, sluggish dives, rolls inferior to P40.

My point is that the energy bleed is too excessive for the Zero in turns. The characteristics don't differ too much from other fighters, other than the fact that it turns in a tighter radius.

Yes I know it turns in a tighter radius than other planes in the game, nor am I demanding that it turns in an even tighter one. However, the energy loss and overall characteristics just don't follow what the historical accounts say of the zero.

Also, stalls are supposed to be docile in the Zero, but it's overly spin-stall happy in this, which is inaccurate. Controls aren't sluggish enough at high speeds too.

Telling me to learn how to fly is irrelevant - I can shoot planes down in this thing, but it just isn't a Zero. Nor am I some fanboy that demands the Zero be stronger just because I want it to be. Zero has its flaws and strengths, neither of which seems to be reflected accurately in FB.

mike_espo
04-07-2004, 09:04 PM
what are you comparing the FB/AEP zero to??????? I fly the zero 21 alot and nobody ever turns inside me and I NEVER use combat flaps. What the heck are you doing????????

"Fatte vede che ridemo!"http://www.flying-tigers.net/caccia%20WW%20II/g50.jpg

[This message was edited by mike_espo on Wed April 07 2004 at 08:41 PM.]