PDA

View Full Version : Don't turn?



Tranie117
09-15-2008, 12:11 PM
O.k. I'm probably about to get verbaly ***** slapped but hear goes.

People keep saying that turning is bad, but I don't get it, why is turning bad. why do people keep sying this nonsense. I mean I know it's all about energy, so hight and speed are good. But so long as I have energy whats wrong with turning, I'm good at turning. Damb sight better at it then climbing...

SeaFireLIV
09-15-2008, 12:32 PM
Turning isn`t bad as long as you have the advantage. It`s good to turn in an I16 when a 109`s on your six. that 109 will lose the fight if he keeps trying to turn with you.

It`s just NOT the answer to every fight. You have to be able to do other things than just turn or you WILL lose 50% of all your combats.

Jaws2002
09-15-2008, 12:56 PM
Don't listen to anyone then,....keep turning. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Sharks feed on the slower fish. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Stingray333
09-15-2008, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by Tranie117:
O.k. I'm probably about to get verbaly ***** slapped but hear goes.

People keep saying that turning is bad, but I don't get it, why is turning bad. why do people keep sying this nonsense. I mean I know it's all about energy, so hight and speed are good. But so long as I have energy whats wrong with turning, I'm good at turning. Damb sight better at it then climbing...


The reason you hear "turning is bad", is that the mentality that develops by only using turns is often one of "follow the leader", or "pure pursuit". i.e. your target leads you around, and you match everyone of its maneuvers trying to keep the pipper on the target trying to get the shot. This results in you draining your energy and wasting what advantage you had at the start (presumably you had an advantage at the start or you probably wouldn't have started the fight in the first place, if you didn't have an advantage, what were you thinking starting the fight in the first place?).


Turning isn't free. It costs energy in terms of increased drag. Of course, some planes can turn without losing energy better than others. When you turn you are trading your energy for angular advantage. If the angular advantage that you gain from the turn doesn't give you the kill, you now are at a reduced energy level and have probably lost your position/energy advantage that you started with and the fight.

So you might be thinking to yourself, "if turning is bad, then not turning must be good!" well, of course this is false, we all must turn, as there is no way to get victories by flying perfectly straight. The difference is in how you turn.

Some examples: a slower traveling bogey heading towards you but is off to your 10 o'clock. You fly until it is at your 9'oclock position, then enter a tight left hand turn to try to get onto its six o'clock. You have traded your energy for an angular advantage with a tracking position on your opponents six. The high-G turn has resulted in a loss of your speed advantage. Was there another way? Instead of turning directly to your target, you pull up and do a hammerhead or immelman type maneuver. You have gained the same angular advantage, as you are now in the targets rear quater, but you now also have a substantial height advantage on your target: You have succeeded in trading your energy for angular advantage and still have energy in the bank.

Another example: you are chasing down a slower target, you are in its rear quater and over taking it quickly. To avoid overshooting and to get into it's six o'clock, you pull back hard on the stick doing a high-G turn and end up on its six o'clock. Again, you have traded your energy for angular advantage. Was there a better way? You do a hi yo-yo maneuver, doing an out of plane turn with your nose high putting you high on your target. You have achieved the same positional advantage, but have maintained your E advantage as well.

So, I wouldn't say "turning is bad" necessarily, but it definitely is bad if it is the only thing you have in your bag of tricks. If you could have performed a different maneuver that would have resulted in a simular angular or positional advantage as the turn, but resulted in maintaining your energy advantage, then that maneuver is better than the straight turn.

Stingray

TinyTim
09-15-2008, 02:46 PM
No one in sane mind ever turns when he has any other option.

stalkervision
09-15-2008, 02:50 PM
A lot of turning bleeds your ac energy state down to nothing.

f4 pilots in vietnam when faced with the much more manauverable migs 17's would attack and then "extend out" away from the migs with their superior airspeed till they were far enough away to reverse their direction and attack them again.

ImMoreBetter
09-15-2008, 03:23 PM
If you mean when someone asks a question and a reply reads simply:

Don't turn.

They are joking about the tenancy for some people to think TnBing is the answer to everything.

Turning isn't bad. Not paying attention to energy conservation may be.

DuxCorvan
09-15-2008, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by Tranie117:
verbally ***** slapped

You gotta love that expression.

VW-IceFire
09-15-2008, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by Tranie117:
O.k. I'm probably about to get verbaly ***** slapped but hear goes.

People keep saying that turning is bad, but I don't get it, why is turning bad. why do people keep sying this nonsense. I mean I know it's all about energy, so hight and speed are good. But so long as I have energy whats wrong with turning, I'm good at turning. Damb sight better at it then climbing...
Well they keep saying because its not nonsense.

Turning IS bad. Why is turning bad? Because any amount of turning burns your energy/speed. Without those two you have nothing.

Air combat is sort of like money. As you climb to altitude you are putting money in the bank. Diving is like a currency exchange where you get more speed for less altitude. Turning is where you toss the money out the window. The more you do it the less money you have to spend until you have almost nothing left. Then you need to get it back or you can't do anything...even turn.

So what traditionally happens in scenarios where pilots have little knowledge of this...they are all flying around at 500 meters with their throttles firewalls and turning as tightly as possible. Their speeds are low.

Enter a more experienced pilot. Diving down from altitude into the swarm such a pilot can pick a vulnerable slow flying plane, target, and destroy, and then zoom back to altitude and repeat. And potentially this move can be done over and over with little exposure to an enemy.

If those people were higher and at more even altitudes...or even with altitude differences...the speed (from lack of turning) will allow them to rapidly climb, to break turn to evade, or do some sort of other move. Without that speed they can't do anything...not fast. And if its at low altitude you can't even dive for speed.

So...turning is bad. Don't do it. Think about how to engage your opponents with as little turn as possible. In a boom and zoom attack move I try and limit myself to a maximum 90 degree turn before breaking off and disengaging to climb for altitude. Sometimes I break this and usually thats when I die http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And I do this in most aircraft types although some more than others. I'll do it in Yaks, Tempests, FW190s, Spitfires, Hurricanes, and the like. I'm more likely to turn more than 90 degrees in a Hurricane or Zero than I am in a 109, 190, or Tempest...but I still limit my turns. Make as few as possible. Diving and climbing is what is key...not turning. Even in WWI where everyone thinks that it was huge furballs of twisting aircraft - the superior fighter type of the war, the Sopwith Camel, was a boom and zoom fighter...not as good at turning as the Fokker Tri-Plane.

Ba5tard5word
09-15-2008, 03:59 PM
you lose speed in a turn and a lot of planes will flip over if you pull back hard on the control stick--the Spitfire, FW-190 and a lot of others do this.

some planes lose a lot more speed in turning than others--the FW-190 loses a buttload of speed if you're doing anything other than flying in a straight line. other planes only lose a bit of speed in a quick turn and won't flip, but eventually will lose a big chunk of speed.

turn on stall/spins and blackouts/redouts in the difficulty menus and you'll have to be a lot smarter with your turns.

TinyTim
09-15-2008, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
A lot of turning bleeds your ac energy state down to nothing.

f4 pilots in vietnam when faced with the much more manauverable migs 17's would attack and then "extend out" away from the migs with their superior airspeed till they were far enough away to reverse their direction and attack them again.

What a good fortune for these fellas that Vietnamese MiG-17s didn't carry Atolls at that time.

blairgowrie
09-15-2008, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tranie117:
verbally ***** slapped

You gotta love that expression. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

For some reason I don't like it and I am not sure why. Maybe it's because I think it is sexist but I am still not sure. I wish I was sure http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

M_Gunz
09-15-2008, 05:14 PM
You *might* lose speed in a turn. It depends on how fast you're going, how hard you turn,
how long you keep the turn going and how much power your plane has at your altitude the way
you manage it.

Unless you're moving really slow, you won't gain speed in much of a turn though.

Just figure that up to between 3 and 4 G's most these fighters could sustain continuous turns
at some speed, the tightest being 2x level 1 G stall (slooowwwww) or less.

Also figure that maneuver is mostly roll and lift and less speed means less possible lift.
A hard jink that won't leave you stalled and probably spinning requires more speed than the
hard level turn allows.

You have to turn -some- now and then. Just be aware of the cost and avoid binging.

P.FunkAdelic
09-15-2008, 05:24 PM
Someone mentioned doing a high yo-yo. I understand the idea but I'm not sure exactly how its accomplished. All the explanations in guides, even together, leave me questioning.

I know that it involves being in a turn, you're going to overtake so you level your wings and pull up. Now the thing I'm not sure about is how you go about the inversion. Do you stop pulling up then roll your plane inverted and keep an eye on the target or do you continue to keep back pressure on the stick while applying aileron in the direction of the target like a barrel roll.

I just don't want to be trying to practice an incorrect maneuver.

M_Gunz
09-15-2008, 05:28 PM
You don't have to be in a turn but you'll need to roll a bit to keep the target in sight.

It's simple. You are going faster than he is but don't want to get in front. So you fly a
longer path and stay behind by zig-zagging in the vertical and getting the occasional shot
in between. That's a yoyo.

Stingray333
09-15-2008, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by P.FunkAdelic:
Someone mentioned doing a high yo-yo. I understand the idea but I'm not sure exactly how its accomplished. All the explanations in guides, even together, leave me questioning.

I know that it involves being in a turn, you're going to overtake so you level your wings and pull up. Now the thing I'm not sure about is how you go about the inversion. Do you stop pulling up then roll your plane inverted and keep an eye on the target or do you continue to keep back pressure on the stick while applying aileron in the direction of the target like a barrel roll.

I just don't want to be trying to practice an incorrect maneuver.

You don't need to do an inversion for a hi yo yo:

http://www.tpub.com/content/aviation2/P-1222/P-12220026.htm

If your in lead pursuit inside the turning circle and do something similar to a hi yo yo with an inversion it is a lag displacement roll:

http://www.tpub.com/content/aviation2/P-1222/P-12220029.htm

... which is similar to a barrel roll attack, but you are rolling the other way:

http://www.tpub.com/content/aviation2/P-1222/P-12220033.htm

P.Funkadelic, seems like your keen on learning more about air combat maneuvers and how to apply them. You should get Robert Shaw's book on the subject if you don't already have it, I ordered it from the "Get it used" section of amazon.com quite cheaply.. great book, but quite dense, it'll take you months to read the and understand whole thing.

Stingray

Edit: just looking a little closer at the image of the barrel roll attack. Is it just me, or does it not make sense, if the grey shaded flight path means you are seeing the cold-side of the attacker?

M_Gunz
09-15-2008, 07:48 PM
Note from the overhead view that at all times the attacker is inside the defenders' turn.

Roll as necessary to keep the target in sight. Barrel roll involves displacing laterally
to your path as well as vertically. Of course if your path curves then so will the yoyo.

Remember that Shaw's book which is really great is also geared directly to jet fighter pilots.
It's not always 1:1 with prop fighters, thrust characteristics are completely different from
one to the next and these prop fighters have nowhere near the ability to recover energy.

Henkie327
09-16-2008, 12:31 AM
If turning is bad, then how is anybody ever going to return to base?

Don't let anybody tell you what is good or bad in this game. It's just a game, so do what you find fun to do, be it turning or just flying straight ahead.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

P.FunkAdelic
09-16-2008, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by Stingray333:
P.Funkadelic, seems like your keen on learning more about air combat maneuvers and how to apply them. You should get Robert Shaw's book on the subject if you don't already have it, I ordered it from the "Get it used" section of amazon.com quite cheaply.. great book, but quite dense, it'll take you months to read the and understand whole thing.
Yea I'm definitely keen to learn. I'm all about going all out since I take enjoyment from games like this by being as good as I can and hopefully learning something cool too. When I played SH3 I was obsessed with doing manual solution torpedo attacks on shipping. You used a stopwatch, some formulas and a calculator sometimes. In many respects the idea of angles and energy which are significant are just as relevant in torpedo solutions. Even when diving to escape the escorts you need to have a 3 dimensional understanding of things. Depth is very important since being deeper delays the arrival of depth charges giving you more time to escape their path. Then theres the psychology of making the right turn at the right time and knowing when to gun the engines for extra inertia.

I have taken notice of Shaw's book as well as the warnings about its targeted applicability. Too bad nobody wrote a similar book for prop fighters.

buzzsaw1939
09-16-2008, 06:43 AM
But But.....I keep flying off the map! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

K_Freddie
09-16-2008, 06:57 AM
Turning is good - It's just that those who do not know how to balance turning and speed, Or those who do not know how to get out the way of a shell stream, will give you VBS's
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-16-2008, 07:26 AM
People who say never, ever turn are just as bad as those who say turn all the time.

I`ve turned in a P39 and taken down a Human zero who tried to outturn me. Now he should have outturned me, but I could tell (through judgement), that he wasn`t doing it right. I knew how to balance my P39n, while sustaining a turn just enough to stay steady and shoot him down.

P39s are BAD turners. Against a more skilled opponent, I would`ve gone into a B & Z or high speed vertical fight.

It all depends on the situation and quick judgement. You need to figure out your opponent within the first few seconds what he`s likely to do or what his skill is like then you know what you can get away with. Even 109 pilots will drop out of a B&Z and turn after you if they think you don`t know how to fight.

There are no absolutes (except that gravity is King and the earth is hard).

Fehler
09-16-2008, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by ImMoreBetter:
If you mean when someone asks a question and a reply reads simply:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Don't turn.

They are joking about the tenancy for some people to think TnBing is the answer to everything.

Turning isn't bad. Not paying attention to energy conservation may be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mainly, the reason most people, especially new ones to energy fighting, use turning (only) tactics is because they are unable or unwilling to think three dimensionally. This tendency dissipates with increased knowledge and skill.

A person that can only thing two dimensionally will always be dominated by a person that can think three dimensionally.

But, if you cannot find the ability to think in three dimensions, at least turn your two dimensions to up and down.

Spinning around, chasing your tail, will get you killed.

Tranie117
09-16-2008, 08:59 AM
I see, thanks for all the replies. i think I'm, getting this now. It's all about Energy (duh) and you lose allot through turning. I'm trying to turn less but it's hard, I don't think I was turning loads too much in the first place. I think I just need to get better at climbing.

And for the record, I wasn't trying to be sexist when I wrote the term verbally ***** slapped. *****slapped just means "Slapped hard" where I'm from.

Blutarski2004
09-16-2008, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by Tranie117:
I see, thanks for all the replies. i think I'm, getting this now. It's all about Energy (duh) and you lose allot through turning. I'm trying to turn less but it's hard, I don't think I was turning loads too much in the first place. I think I just need to get better at climbing.

And for the record, I wasn't trying to be sexist when I wrote the term verbally ***** slapped. *****slapped just means "Slapped hard" where I'm from.


..... One of the other good things about flying a high yoyo is that, if you put a little bit of roll into your pitch up, you can keep a good tracking view of the target through the top of your canopy.

M_Gunz
09-16-2008, 11:02 AM
Turning usually is meaning level turns. If you turn on a tilt or pure vertical then gravity
will assist your turn.

You can change direction by pointing the nose up or down and roll to point the top of your
plane where you want to go and pull back which is a turn, sort of and does cost some speed
though generally you can regain most or all the loss when you drop back down and/or run
somewhat more straight for a while. Change of direction this way is -much- faster than
going around a level circle.
This is why planes with great roll rates are really highly maneuverable even though they
may turn on the flat like bricks. Examples: FW and P-47 -- used right are killers.

Brain32
09-16-2008, 01:02 PM
OK I posted, now use your imagination about what would I say http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

DKoor
09-16-2008, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
OK I posted, now use your imagination about what would I say http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif This thread turn wrong? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

TinyTim
09-16-2008, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
People who say never, ever turn are just as bad as those who say turn all the time.

I`ve turned in a P39 and taken down a Human zero who tried to outturn me. Now he should have outturned me, but I could tell (through judgement), that he wasn`t doing it right. I knew how to balance my P39n, while sustaining a turn just enough to stay steady and shoot him down.

Yeah, similarly, I managed to outturn and shoot down spitfires and La5FNs in my 190A (I did it only when I was sure they have no wingman around and when we were high enough that I still had a dive-escape opportunity window). They were so surprised to see me turning, that in panic did something wrong - usually pulled to hard and stalled. Of course I was labeled as a cheater two sedonds later.

Flying unpredictable and trying to predict what your oponent predicts about you is worth more than a quad Mk108. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-16-2008, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:


Yeah, similarly, I managed to outturn and shoot down spitfires and La5FNs in my 190A (I did it only when I was sure they have no wingman around and when we were high enough that I still had a dive-escape opportunity window). They were so surprised to see me turning, that in panic did something wrong - usually pulled to hard and stalled. Of course I was labeled as a cheater two sedonds later.

Flying unpredictable and trying to predict what your oponent predicts about you is worth more than a quad Mk108. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

That`s exactly it. It`s not JUST turning, but knowing how FAR you can turn and how long you can maintain the turn. You have to be able to literally teeter on the edge of a stall to win.

This is why an experienced pilot in a non-turning plane (190 or P39, etc) can sometimes outturn an experienced guy who thinks `Just turn`, then panics when that `unturnable` bogey is matching his turn. then they panick, go too hard, and usually stall out - or get shot down.

Then they sit their puzzled for a while.

It`s only something you get from time and practise.

VW-IceFire
09-16-2008, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:


Yeah, similarly, I managed to outturn and shoot down spitfires and La5FNs in my 190A (I did it only when I was sure they have no wingman around and when we were high enough that I still had a dive-escape opportunity window). They were so surprised to see me turning, that in panic did something wrong - usually pulled to hard and stalled. Of course I was labeled as a cheater two sedonds later.

Flying unpredictable and trying to predict what your oponent predicts about you is worth more than a quad Mk108. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

That`s exactly it. It`s not JUST turning, but knowing how FAR you can turn and how long you can maintain the turn. You have to be able to literally teeter on the edge of a stall to win.

This is why an experienced pilot in a non-turning plane (190 or P39, etc) can sometimes outturn an experienced guy who thinks `Just turn`, then panics when that `unturnable` bogey is matching his turn. then they panick, go too hard, and usually stall out - or get shot down.

Then they sit their puzzled for a while.

It`s only something you get from time and practise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which is why I suggest to newer pilots not to turn. It gets them all confused but then they start thinking.

I DO turn...sometimes I do get into a turning battle because I'm bored and just want to do something different and sometimes it is, as you and TinyTim say, because it was appropriate at the time and it let you get advantage.

You can even turn fight in a FW190...but it takes a bit of effort.

DKoor
09-16-2008, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by Fehler:
Spinning around, chasing your tail, will get you killed. A popular term around here, "this cannot be stressed enough" is appropriate here.

Of course on many servers where primary goal is fun, casual flying people tend to exercise this chasing the tail mentality a lot more than on "realistic" servers where fights are different in their nature because almost everyone looks for some kind of "way out of there", safety option.

Without energy or altitude there can not be successful escape that is why one can see people grouping, driving their machines really fast and engaging their enemy from above, or in case they have more maneuverable plane even from co-alt... point being that they will engage in some kind of advantage scenario.

That is why FW has almost iconic status around here, people have learned that speedy plane with mean cannons mounted on it really kick ****.

M_Gunz
09-16-2008, 11:00 PM
As long as a person can only shoot effectively from close in six o'clock, those level turns
and turn rates will terribly important.

P.FunkAdelic
09-16-2008, 11:55 PM
As a newbie my mentality has evolved basically to favour BnZ high altitude style flying simply because the intelligent and correct expenditure of energy is a hard skill to master it seems and I have little clue as to when to use my energy for a turn. I can easily however figure out when to dive more or less.

Some people say that flying a Zero would be a great start because its so forgiving. To my mind thats inverted. A plane that is over forgiving in the horizontal plane and punishes you for being aggressive in the vertical (I've read that the Zero has terrible dive performance compared to say the Wildcat)seems to me might reinforce the wrong ideas about combat. Make it seem like everything is some extravagant Samurai battle of sharp turns and intense shooting.

I find that taking a more modest high flying, disciplined in selecting combat, approach to offer me more success and allows me to observe opportunities for using more radical turns and to give me the power to decide when to use them. If I take a spit or a zero and try to turn with the best of them then I probably will die much faster than I'll learn anything from it. I might even end up yanking just to try and survive again reinforcing bad habits.

Just a nublit's point of view on it. I'm finding using energy fighters to be very educational as well as humbling. I can have successes and see where I make mistakes and realize that my mistakes were deeper than just not using the correct maneuver combo like I'm playing Street Fighter.

It just seems to me that learning to fly your fighter level and use altitude and speed first is better than learning to use a turn. By being in a plane thats so vulnerable below 3000m it, I think, will make me ever more respectful of not wasting energy even when I go and fly a TnB bird.

Kettenhunde
09-17-2008, 02:01 PM
Yeah, similarly, I managed to outturn and shoot down spitfires and La5FNs in my 190A

Try rolling in the opposite direction and then begining to turn. I am curious if it works in your game.

All the Best,

Crumpp

Grey_Mouser67
09-17-2008, 02:45 PM
If you read Shaw's book, you'll find it is very applicable to prop fighters. In fact, he is constantly noting through his book where there are similarities and differences. If you want to understand the "science" behind it, Shaw's book is THE book to start with alond with some of the better posters on this forum.

When I started with the game, I just turned...when I had an La 7, I shot down more planes than I did with the P-47. I read one online pilot's (complete with track) guide to energy fighting (Josef) or a name like that and it all clicked for me. I watched the B&Z crowd and naturally gravitated to that form of combat but I was missing the energy management side of it. Once I stumbled on the missing link, my pilot skills increased enormously...especially when coupled with the right plane. The best plane for me and my fighting style was a Fw 190...fast, heavy fire power, and excellent manueverability at high speed. I learned first on a P-47 when the energy retention modelling was really bad but when the .50's were scattered but packed more of a wallop. When I mastered that plane, I could do it in all planes. After that, I disliked flying the La's because of their poor altitude performance, low break up speeds and poor high speed handling.

Turning is a part of all combat...there comes a point in every combant when you have to pull lead, gain angles (Shaw 101) and kill your opponent...the trick to successful combat is to acheive this goal in the most efficient manner possible...which nearly always involve a verticle component to your manuevering.

I find that one of the most critical components to survival, especially online, is how quickly you engage, dismember your opponent and then disengage. Turn fights tend to be long and slow you down and even when you kill your opponent you will often times be killed leaving the battlefield. Fast planes with big guns and high speed manueverability are the best to learn in....Fw 190 is my #1 ride for this style of combat followed closely by the 109, Spitfire, Tempest and P-47.

Pick a plane that doesn't turn well like the Fw and become proficient in that...you will be forced to learn energy management you will become a much better pilot. The game has been around a long time now so there are a bunch of online aces that can speed up your learning.

Mouser

M_Gunz
09-17-2008, 04:03 PM
Yes, Fighter Combat is very applicable to all aerial combat including WWI and WWII.
But it's not ALL going to directly work as shown to props.

It takes some sense and understanding and I wouldn't say that except for one person in
particular who used to grossly misapply parts of that very book right on this forum.

BTW, how often do you pull 6G turns in combat? Easy to tell, you go through gray into
the edge of blackout. Just wondering because someone here really used to push 6G turns.

Wildnoob
09-17-2008, 04:15 PM
I gonna introduce IL2 to some friends with the correct combat tactics, and gonna training them as they never going to think that the P-51 or the Fw-190 are porked.

Xiolablu3
09-17-2008, 04:40 PM
The big problem with a close-in turn/dogfight is that even if you win, you are an absolute sitting duck for any other enemy plane which appears on the scene, flopping around on the deck with no energy.

If you get into such an energy bleeding turnfight then you MUST have top cover.

Altamov_Steppes
09-17-2008, 07:11 PM
B&Z is T&B in the vertical direction...think about it!

M_Gunz
09-17-2008, 10:19 PM
T&B is two planes co-alt and co-speed with the follower trying to stay saddled up long enough
to shoot the other down. They don't necessarily have to stay level as long as the target is
burning off all excess energy in hard turns. Of course while doing that he is also severely
limited in height gain but can and often will spiral down. The attacker must follow to play
this game.

BnZ is attacking with a high delta-V, getting limited time shots and exiting with possible repeat only after extension.

I have yet to see a BnZ where the attacker stayed anywhere near close behind the target.
Perhaps a track of this phenomenon would help me understand, somehow.

There is a third option known as energy fighting. IIRC it was formalized in the 50's but
at least parts of it were practiced as far back as WWI.

Stingray333
09-17-2008, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There is a third option known as energy fighting. IIRC it was formalized in the 50's but
at least parts of it were practiced as far back as WWI.

I have heard this notion of "energy fighting" referred to before, but have never had any elaboration on it, do you happen to have any references, or could you perhaps give some clues as to the nature of it?

Thanks,

Stingray

Stingray333
09-17-2008, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by P.FunkAdelic:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stingray333:
P.Funkadelic, seems like your keen on learning more about air combat maneuvers and how to apply them. You should get Robert Shaw's book on the subject if you don't already have it, I ordered it from the "Get it used" section of amazon.com quite cheaply.. great book, but quite dense, it'll take you months to read the and understand whole thing.
Yea I'm definitely keen to learn. I'm all about going all out since I take enjoyment from games like this by being as good as I can and hopefully learning something cool too. When I played SH3 I was obsessed with doing manual solution torpedo attacks on shipping. You used a stopwatch, some formulas and a calculator sometimes. In many respects the idea of angles and energy which are significant are just as relevant in torpedo solutions. Even when diving to escape the escorts you need to have a 3 dimensional understanding of things. Depth is very important since being deeper delays the arrival of depth charges giving you more time to escape their path. Then theres the psychology of making the right turn at the right time and knowing when to gun the engines for extra inertia.

I have taken notice of Shaw's book as well as the warnings about its targeted applicability. Too bad nobody wrote a similar book for prop fighters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Shaw's book still is quite applicable for prop fighters, there are a lot of quotes and anecdotes from WWI and WWII fighters and much of it is fairly general. Even though there are portions of the book dedicated to missiles and radar, and sometimes he assumes you have the thrust of a jet engine behind you, it still provides some very valuable insight and discussion on ACM and fighter tactics, you should still think about getting it if you can

Stingray

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Stingray333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There is a third option known as energy fighting. IIRC it was formalized in the 50's but
at least parts of it were practiced as far back as WWI.

I have heard this notion of "energy fighting" referred to before, but have never had any elaboration on it, do you happen to have any references, or could you perhaps give some clues as to the nature of it?

Thanks,

Stingray </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's one thing Shaw teaches in Fighter Combat and there are other sources. IIRC Boyd first
formalized the concept. There was Bullethead's AirWarrior Training pages that had a condensed
version but those seem to be gone.

You see many examples posted here as alternatives to TnB fighting.

Energy referred to is your kinetic energy of speed and weight (some would say other words that
don't add diddly) and your potential energy of height and weight. You can trade them back and
forth, you can blow them in hard maneuvers and your engine can replace them in time.

There's a lot of pages online that will tell you about energy fighting, some are even good.

This one ain't bad at all, for example. (http://bravo.raf662.com/ACM%20Training.htm)
They do lay out straight that sometimes you want to fight Angles and sometimes Energy.


Angles fighting is based on the relative, sustained turning ability of the planes. It is characterized by high gee turns and maneuvers, right on the edge of stalling or blacking out. To quote Robert Shaw, top gun instructor,"...the angles tactician has essentially two choices: He can turn harder or he can turn smarter. Although the primary objective for the angles fighter is to achieve a position advantage, energy considerations cannot be ignored with impunity. An angles fighter that races around the sky with its pilot pulling on the pole as hard as he can, normally will lose energy in the process."


Energy (E) tactics are almost the diametric opposite of angles tactics. Energy can either be potential=altitude or kinetic=speed. Energy tactics are characterized by low gee maneuvers and most of them happen in the vertical (i.e. anything but the horizontal) plane. The E tactician attempts to generate sufficient separation between himself and his opponent, ideally the separation is from a position of altitude that allows him to pull down on the enemy's 6 without being threatened himself.

And another:
Here's someone who heard of or knew Bullethead and has a more complete layout. (http://members.fortunecity.com/8th_teague/html/e-fighting4.htm#efight)
Although I really don't care at all for the page style, the text can be cut&pasted into Wordpad
and becomes readable as well as saveable, printable and other -ables, even deletable.
Just highlighting it by selecting for C&P gets rid of the background and helps readability.

On further examination it appears that it might be Bullethead's old material or expanded upon,
I grabbed a copy to save since I lost my copy of the original training pages years ago.
Think of it as a digest version of Shaw, then get Fighter Combat anyway!
Bullethead had other chapters but so does this guy but it's not the same layout, here's the home. (http://members.fortunecity.com/8th_teague/)

Hope this helps and not just wasting your time.

P.FunkAdelic
09-18-2008, 01:56 AM
@Stingray

Yea I know I'm gonna grab it, I just think I'll have to get it online since I don't think Chapters would stock it very much. Kind of a niche thing.

Amazon has it for $23. Gonna look for a few other good books, probably aircraft related, and bulk buy.

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 08:29 AM
$23 is very good. I paid $35 at a mall B. Dalton's in 1988.
Don't miss the preface.

Stingray333
09-18-2008, 10:03 AM
Thanks for that M_Gunz

Stingray

Altamov_Steppes
09-18-2008, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
BTW, how often do you pull 6G turns in combat? Easy to tell, you go through gray into
the edge of blackout. Just wondering because someone here really used to push 6G turns.

Aircraft in il-2 could go higher G's. Approaching 'blackout' and 'redout' were normal routine for WW2 fighter pilots.

The key to knowing your fighter in the turning context is how far it is stressed to take G's.
A Standard Rate One turn is 360 degrees in two minutes. To maintain a Rate One turn at different airspeeds is a matter of knowing which bank angle at that particular airspeed does not overstress the aircraft in the turn (there is in fact a mathematical method for calculating this critical bank angle).

After 60 degrees bank the G load increases rapidly for at 60 degree bank the load factor is exactly twice that in level flight which has a load factor of +1 in positive attitude and -1 in inverted attitude. At 75 degrees bank you would be approaching stress limits and a higher stall speed and if you are not sustaining the turn rate you will be approaching stall very quickly whether at low speed or high speed.

It's advisable to work out the 'rate of turn' and 'radius of turn' and the various load factors (lift/weight) at specific bank angle and airspeeds for your fighter before you can really get to know what it can do in a turn other than a Rate One Turn.

Regards KT

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 07:00 PM
When you learn more about aerodynamics then you will find that in level turns, bank angle
determines G's regardless of the true speed you are traveling. The speed you are traveling
only affects the radius. that's why doghouse charts are made for specific altitudes.

As far as pulling redout or blackout being routine, I suggest you count the tales where they
did and then count the missions flown or even total combats. Erich Hartmann did not routinely
pull into blackout or even greyout. Find me one WWII pilot that actually STATES that he did
as opposed to readers of war stories who CONCLUDE that was the case.

I HAVE read many times over of 4 G's and under being considered a hard turn. WWII fighters,
by the words of the pilots who flew them could MAINTAIN very hard turns. Go look up how many
G's those planes could sustain in turns, it's generally if not all under 4 G's. BUT Johnny
Joystick the gamer reads "hard turn" and has heard of JET pilots going up to 9 G's so that
sets the scale for Johnny.

Korean War, a very famous Ace and his wingman get jumped by MiGs. He has his wingman go into
a descending spiral at how many G's? FOUR. Why? Because not only he and his wingmate have
to endure it but the MiG pilots chasing them do too. They both get away.


It's advisable to work out the 'rate of turn' and 'radius of turn' and the various load factors (lift/weight) at specific bank angle and airspeeds for your fighter before you can really get to know what it can do in a turn other than a Rate One Turn.

You give me advice to do what you don't know more than the terms of. But you don't know how
it works so you make up your own rules. Bank Angle and Rise/Descent are what Sets G's.

If you really want to contradict me on that then show your methods of calculating just what
you described and some kind of verification of those. I won't hold my breath waiting.

With practice you can know how to approach the edge and have a very good idea of how hard you
can turn for any speed you're at, even about what rate you should lose speed in the turn.
You don't have to be exact and you don't need a frikking chart, esp when your attention should
be elsewhere.

While you're at it, you can go straighten these guys out as well. (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/performance/q0146.shtml)

Stingray333
09-18-2008, 07:11 PM
Is there a way to estimate the amount of G your pulling in the planes in IL-2? Besides from waiting until the screen starts going black/red?

Stingray

Altamov_Steppes
09-18-2008, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by Stingray333:
Is there a way to estimate the amount of G your pulling in the planes in IL-2? Besides from waiting until the screen starts going black/red?

Stingray

yes!

Altamov_Steppes
09-18-2008, 08:11 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
When you learn more about aerodynamics then you will find that in level turns, bank angle
determines G's regardless of the true speed you are traveling. The speed you are traveling
only affects the radius. that's why doghouse charts are made for specific altitudes.

As far as pulling redout or blackout being routine, I suggest you count the tales where they
did and then count the missions flown or even total combats. Erich Hartmann did not routinely
pull into blackout or even greyout. Find me one WWII pilot that actually STATES that he did
as opposed to readers of war stories who CONCLUDE that was the case.

I HAVE read many times over of 4 G's and under being considered a hard turn. WWII fighters,
by the words of the pilots who flew them could MAINTAIN very hard turns. Go look up how many
G's those planes could sustain in turns, it's generally if not all under 4 G's. BUT Johnny
Joystick the gamer reads "hard turn" and has heard of JET pilots going up to 9 G's so that
sets the scale for Johnny.

Korean War, a very famous Ace and his wingman get jumped by MiGs. He has his wingman go into
a descending spiral at how many G's? FOUR. Why? Because not only he and his wingmate have
to endure it but the MiG pilots chasing them do too. They both get away.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's advisable to work out the 'rate of turn' and 'radius of turn' and the various load factors (lift/weight) at specific bank angle and airspeeds for your fighter before you can really get to know what it can do in a turn other than a Rate One Turn.

You give me advice to do what you don't know more than the terms of. But you don't know how
it works so you make up your own rules. Bank Angle and Rise/Descent are what Sets G's.

If you really want to contradict me on that then show your methods of calculating just what
you described and some kind of verification of those. I won't hold my breath waiting.

With practice you can know how to approach the edge and have a very good idea of how hard you
can turn for any speed you're at, even about what rate you should lose speed in the turn.
You don't have to be exact and you don't need a frikking chart, esp when your attention should
be elsewhere.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">(stick memo here): and (write 1 000 times): I must remember to avoid sounding as if I'm having a direct conversation with M-Gunz.</span> http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by Altamov_Steppes:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
BTW, how often do you pull 6G turns in combat? Easy to tell, you go through gray into
the edge of blackout. Just wondering because someone here really used to push 6G turns.

Aircraft in il-2 could go higher G's. Approaching 'blackout' and 'redout' were normal routine for WW2 fighter pilots.

Regards KT </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


(stick memo here): and (write 1 000 times): I must remember to avoid sounding as if I'm having a direct conversation with M-Gunz. Roll Eyes

Yeah, right, play at appearances for all it's worth while laying out your rafts of BS.

Poor little troll. You know where to stick your memo since your head is already there.

Altamov_Steppes
09-18-2008, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
When you learn more about aerodynamics then you will find that in level turns, bank angle
determines G's regardless of the true speed you are traveling. The speed you are traveling
only affects the radius. that's why doghouse charts are made for specific altitudes.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">i know I shouldn't respond to trolling but I'm only up to 200 writes and no memo yet so here goes: you are so patronising in your belief in your superiority. G's are in fact a measure of the load factor i.e degree of lift divided by degree of weight; or more to the point a measure of force against the aircraft under the influence of gravity. Load factor increases with angle of bank even at low airspeed but there Must be airspeed to give rise to lift against the weight being lifted. So now: you go and find your precious bank angle at any stall speed (high or low speed stall) and see how many g's you pull just by angle of bank.</span>

As far as pulling redout or blackout being routine, I suggest you count the tales where they
did and then count the missions flown or even total combats. Erich Hartmann did not routinely
pull into blackout or even greyout. Find me one WWII pilot that actually STATES that he did
as opposed to readers of war stories who CONCLUDE that was the case.

I HAVE read many times over of 4 G's and under being considered a hard turn. WWII fighters,
by the words of the pilots who flew them could MAINTAIN very hard turns. Go look up how many
G's those planes could sustain in turns, it's generally if not all under 4 G's. BUT Johnny
Joystick the gamer reads "hard turn" and has heard of JET pilots going up to 9 G's so that
sets the scale for Johnny.

Korean War, a very famous Ace and his wingman get jumped by MiGs. He has his wingman go into
a descending spiral at how many G's? FOUR. Why? Because not only he and his wingmate have
to endure it but the MiG pilots chasing them do too. They both get away.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Aerobatic aircraft routinely pull 9 G's and it's reasonable to assume that WW2 aircraft had to be similarly stressed for such forces even if not of the same calibre of airframe engineering (with the possible exception of the 109). In addition, I recall reading WW2 pilots testifying that it was so and I have heard the same from the same source pool. It's up to you to find same and then explain the trolling you are up to</span>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's advisable to work out the 'rate of turn' and 'radius of turn' and the various load factors (lift/weight) at specific bank angle and airspeeds for your fighter before you can really get to know what it can do in a turn other than a Rate One Turn.

You give me advice to do what you don't know more than the terms of. But you don't know how
it works so you make up your own rules. Bank Angle and Rise/Descent are what Sets G's.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Wrong! G's are set by gravity and by whomever or whoever or whatever set gravity. in short G's are a natural force. It is the Load factor produced by the lift/by the weight that is increased by bank angle and the resulting load on the aircraft is measured in G's</span>

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">...and there's No Advice to you or anyone Man!. Just a contribution to a discussion that was in fact started by someone seeking facilitation on turning performance; Is it not facilitation which is ostensibly what this forum is supposed to offer and consequently solicits contributions to that end?You don't wseem to tolerate too well the wide range of opinions needed for that</span>

If you really want to contradict me on that then show your methods of calculating just what
you described and some kind of verification of those. I won't hold my breath waiting.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">baiting and trolling!</span>

With practice you can know how to approach the edge and have a very good idea of how hard you
can turn for any speed you're at, even about what rate you should lose speed in the turn.
You don't have to be exact and you don't need a frikking chart, esp when your attention should
be elsewhere.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">So now prediciton of G force is not useful against experience and intuition!. Off we go into the wild blue yonder and eventually off the planet</span>

While you're at it, you can go straighten these guys out as well. (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/performance/q0146.shtml) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">oh I see; the essence of your complaint is that I insult your sources...which I have not read and do not need to read. That charge is somehow all too familiar from you. I'm sure they are as straight as I am on it...but who knows?

over and out!</span>

Buzzsaw-
09-18-2008, 09:53 PM
Salute

I don't know what everyone's talking about.

Everybody turns. Turning is good. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Even your most fanatic b & zer turns. Hell if they didn't, they'd never line up their shots.

The real question is, HOW MUCH DO I TURN?

And that of course, depends on several factors.

1) How well does my aircraft turn?
2) How much speed and/or energy do I have?
3) How well does my opponent's aircraft turn?
4) How much speed and/or energy does he have?
5) Are there other aircraft within threat range? How well does their aircraft turn? How much speed and/or energy do they have?

If you are not making those calculations every second, you'll never be any good as a virtual fighter pilot.

Nobody can give you a simple answer to your question because the answer depends on the tactical situation, and tactical situations are infinitely variable.

Let's just say, that the only rule in the air is that there are no rules except the one which counts.

"The fighter pilots have to rove in the area alotted to them in any way they like, and when they spot an enemy they attack and shoot him down, anything else is rubbish." Manfred von Richthofen

Altamov_Steppes
09-18-2008, 10:26 PM
Well I guess when it comes down to it, after boot camp flight training and first combat the three most recognised abilities of a fighter pilot probably are:
1. improvisation
2. improvisation; and
3. improvisation

'...natural born flyers?: bird's only...'
Captain Willian O'Brien 357th Fighter Group USAAF

'...I doubt that I had any "natural flying ability", and I do not know of anyone else that I felt had any natural ability other than good co-ordination, eyesight and quick responses...'
2nd Lieutenant Robert N Jensen USAF (Ret)

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by Altamov_Steppes:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">oh I see; the essence of your complaint is that I insult your sources...which I have not read and do not need to read. That charge is somehow all too familiar from you. I'm sure they are as straight as I am on it...but who knows?

over and out!</span>

That along with the rest of your BS is wrong.
I backed up my words and you back up NOTHING.
Anyone who wants to be ignorant can follow your lead.

But then you are the internet terrorist which comes down to spreader of lies and BS.
No wonder you have no friends.

Buzzsaw-
09-18-2008, 11:05 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Altamov_Steppes:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">oh I see; the essence of your complaint is that I insult your sources...which I have not read and do not need to read. That charge is somehow all too familiar from you. I'm sure they are as straight as I am on it...but who knows?

over and out!</span>

That along with the rest of your BS is wrong.
I backed up my words and you back up NOTHING.
Anyone who wants to be ignorant can follow your lead.

But then you are the internet terrorist which comes down to spreader of lies and BS.
No wonder you have no friends. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, guess I'm no longer Max's main man... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

Altamov sure seems to get him going... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

M_Gunz
09-18-2008, 11:25 PM
You never were my "main man". I don't care for names, only content.

G's in a level turn is elementary physics.

Flying straight and level the lift vector is straight up and = weight of plane.

At any bank angle the lift vector is tilted due to banked wings.
The inward component of lift is what turns the plane in coordinated flight.

To stay level the upward component of lift must = weight of plane.
The inward component can be figured using simple trigonometry, it is tangent of the bank angle
times the upward component.

ADD: tangent is an error here -- it is the secant of the bank angle = 1/cos bank angle

The upward component = 1 G exactly which yields the inward component in G's of acceleration.

This is for a level turn and can be checked by anyone with HS level physics skill.
I post this for new people who want to learn and don't want to be ignorant whackoffs.

TS_Sancho
09-18-2008, 11:53 PM
If I may add to a lot of great advice( and a couple of novice fallacies) when you want to redirect which way your guns are pointing, always maneuver in the vertical,never in the horizontal.Try to focus on simply flying "smoothly" while staying fast.Never fly straight and level for more than 20 seconds to maintain situational awareness.
You'll find that your opponents turn radius will have little bearing on the outcome of the fight other than prolonging their loss through radical defensive breaks that leave them at an even bigger dissadvantage.With this lesson learned comes the understanding of why superior rollrate is the dealbreaker, superior 2 dimensional turn radius is actually an advantage easily nullified.This is why FW190 Anton well flown can dominate SpitV.Unless FW gets greedy or sloppy( remember, DONT TURN!)FW dictates when to fight and when to leave.
Of course theory is great but stick time is truth.Hope this helped.

Altamov_Steppes
09-19-2008, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
You never were my "main man". I don't care for names, only content.

G's in a level turn is elementary physics.

Flying straight and level the lift vector is straight up and = weight of plane.

At any bank angle the lift vector is tilted due to banked wings.
The inward component of lift is what turns the plane in coordinated flight.

To stay level the upward component of lift must = weight of plane.
The inward component can be figured using simple trigonometry, it is tangent of the bank angle
times the upward component.
The upward component = 1 G exactly which yields the inward component in G's of acceleration.

This is for a level turn and can be checked by anyone with HS level physics skill.
I post this for new people who want to learn and don't want to be ignorant whackoffs.



And so you slowly come around...it seems you not only have been seeing the wood and not the trees you insist on seeing the wood your own way (as per your motto listed in every post). Somehow you glimpsed the trees.

btw the 'inward lift component' does not 'turn' the aircraft...it assists to change the aircraft's direction by angles under acceleration (being technically correct which I'm sure you will appreciate).
At 90 degrees bank angle the 'lift' is not tilted; at 180 degrees the load factor is negative and the 'lift' vector is negative (elevators down please).
At less than 90 degrees positive bank angle the pilot ought to use rudder to change the direction and elevators to maintain or change altitude in the turn...but Ho Hum this has all been gone through before.

P.FunkAdelic
09-19-2008, 01:16 AM
Just a random question while everyone has their 'science of flight' caps on.

Is there a generally preferred angle for a zoom climb? How should you curve your angle as airspeed decreases?

I hear reference to some elementary ideas but often theres a bit of methodology left out. I often find myself still with the bogey on my 6 at the same distance even after a zoom climb in a superior climbing fighter without too large a disparity in energy states.

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 01:18 AM
Play with the word definitions however you want, Bank Angle determines G-loading in level turn.
Speed only determines turn radius and turn rate, not turn G's.

I don't see you prove or demonstrate anything but your ability to babble and disseminate.

Bank angle 90 degrees or more cannot make a level turn in coordinated flight. Keep on playing
in your own special world of BS.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from people who are not only more serious than a dork troll but know what they write about. (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/performance/q0146.shtml)


The first of these equations is directly related to the question you've posed. If you plug in a value of 60�, you'll find that the load factor n is equal to 2. You'll also note that the variable of speed does not show up in this equation, only the bank angle. It is for this reason that the load factor is independent of velocity. Any aircraft in a level turn and pulling a given number of g's must maintain a constant bank angle independent of its speed or its weight.

Where speed does come into play is in the radius of turn and turn rate, both of which can be derived from the relationship for the component of lift that turns the aircraft.

Robert Shaw shows the same relation in Fighter Combat.

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Altamov_Steppes:
btw the 'inward lift component' does not 'turn' the aircraft...

The inward lift component provides the energy to turn the path of the airplane.

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 01:50 AM
Originally posted by P.FunkAdelic:
Just a random question while everyone has their 'science of flight' caps on.

Is there a generally preferred angle for a zoom climb? How should you curve your angle as airspeed decreases?

I hear reference to some elementary ideas but often theres a bit of methodology left out. I often find myself still with the bogey on my 6 at the same distance even after a zoom climb in a superior climbing fighter without too large a disparity in energy states.

The angle depends on the plane and how fast you are going. A big part of that is the transition
into the zoom angle as pulling up can bleed off more or less speed. If the pursuit is not close
behind you then he can pull up more gently and lose less energy to end up following you.

Remember that speed at the start of the zoom is your major factor.

A plane with superior sustained climb rate may not be so great in the zoom, it's the faster
plane that will probably do better until speed bleeds down to sustained climb speed. Compare
a 109 with better climb rate to a 190 with higher top speed -- same zoom angle and start speed,
I would expect the 190 to bleed less speed until it hits its sustained climb since the 190 with
the higher top speed will have more excess power than the 109 at the same speed.
Note that I specify the 190 in the example having the higher top speed.
Another example would be a Zero and a P-51, when the zoom ends at P-51 sustained climb then the
P-51 will zoom higher in the same time than the Zero with better best sustained climb rate.

When comparing performance between two planes it's best to use performance at the speeds they
each will be going. I use simple language here so expect redefinition, misinformation and
empty implication to be made of all this. It matters not if you understand the point. Of
course the point of the troll is to contradict, not to inform.

As to what speed to end the zoom, it's best to make sure you can still maneuver hard enough to
evade. For most of these fighters I would not go below 320 kph and be happier with 360+ kph.
If you top the zoom with a wingover-type turn or indeed just make the whole zoom into one big
slow turn then you will be much harder to target. Add a slow bobbing movement and you will
be even moreso. If the enemy is very close however you should be evading some other way and
not zooming at all. You see why getting slow is a mistake? A slow plane is more sluggish,
test that yourself.

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by TS_Sancho:
If I may add to a lot of great advice( and a couple of novice fallacies) when you want to redirect which way your guns are pointing, always maneuver in the vertical,never in the horizontal.Try to focus on simply flying "smoothly" while staying fast.Never fly straight and level for more than 20 seconds to maintain situational awareness.
You'll find that your opponents turn radius will have little bearing on the outcome of the fight other than prolonging their loss through radical defensive breaks that leave them at an even bigger dissadvantage.With this lesson learned comes the understanding of why superior rollrate is the dealbreaker, superior 2 dimensional turn radius is actually an advantage easily nullified.This is why FW190 Anton well flown can dominate SpitV.Unless FW gets greedy or sloppy( remember, DONT TURN!)FW dictates when to fight and when to leave.
Of course theory is great but stick time is truth.Hope this helped.

+1 --- that is good energy fighting!

P.FunkAdelic
09-19-2008, 04:40 AM
Thanks for the tips Gunz. You've been very helpful and patient with more than a few of my questions by now.

Cheers

Blutarski2004
09-19-2008, 04:56 AM
Originally posted by TS_Sancho:
If I may add to a lot of great advice( and a couple of novice fallacies) when you want to redirect which way your guns are pointing, always maneuver in the vertical,never in the horizontal.Try to focus on simply flying "smoothly" while staying fast.Never fly straight and level for more than 20 seconds to maintain situational awareness.
You'll find that your opponents turn radius will have little bearing on the outcome of the fight other than prolonging their loss through radical defensive breaks that leave them at an even bigger dissadvantage.With this lesson learned comes the understanding of why superior rollrate is the dealbreaker, superior 2 dimensional turn radius is actually an advantage easily nullified.This is why FW190 Anton well flown can dominate SpitV.Unless FW gets greedy or sloppy( remember, DONT TURN!)FW dictates when to fight and when to leave.
Of course theory is great but stick time is truth.Hope this helped.


..... Excellent post, Sancho. S!

DKoor
09-19-2008, 07:40 AM
Gotta agree with Blutarski, a nice posthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif.

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 03:40 PM
I think it's a matter of gunnery. If you can't shoot well except from locked close on the six
then what choice is there besides saddling up?

Afterhours
09-20-2008, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Play with the word definitions however you want, Bank Angle determines G-loading in level turn.
Speed only determines turn radius and turn rate, not turn G's.

That's funny. So if my bank angle is 90 degrees and my speed is 1 km/hr, I will be at max Gs and my wings will break off!!!

Brilliant......

Afterhours
09-20-2008, 09:06 AM
P39s are BAD turners. .

Not in IL2, a p-39 is one of the best turning aircraft in the sim. It WILL turn with later zeros easily, it will out-turn any 109 too.

If you fly on an online server that is hosted in Russia or another eastern bloc nation that has hard settings, then you will fly against P-39 pilots, and pilots of other VVS aircraft that will show you exactly what can be done with them in this sim.

If you cannot turn well in a p-39 in this sim you do not know what you are doing in it, period.

Tranny, experience will teach you when to turn and when not to. Just go out there online and start getting shot down. If you are smart you will learn what to do and when. If you are not then nothing will help you anyway.

DKoor
09-20-2008, 09:26 AM
P-39 is maneuverable, but I'd never really go into maneuver fight in any P-39 vs well flown Bf-109F4. Just sayinghttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif.

M_Gunz
09-20-2008, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by Afterhours:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Play with the word definitions however you want, Bank Angle determines G-loading in level turn.
Speed only determines turn radius and turn rate, not turn G's.

That's funny. So if my bank angle is 90 degrees and my speed is 1 km/hr, I will be at max Gs and my wings will break off!!!

Brilliant...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pay attention: IN LEVEL CO-ORDINATED TURNS

Do you think that you can fly level and coordinated at either 1 kph or in 90 deg bank?
Oh yeah... "Brilliant". Try again big shot.

BTW, how many logins you have now TrashAllOver/KT?

Fehler
09-20-2008, 11:04 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah, similarly, I managed to outturn and shoot down spitfires and La5FNs in my 190A

Try rolling in the opposite direction and then begining to turn. I am curious if it works in your game.

All the Best,

Crumpp </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does Crumpp... But Shhhh, don't tell all the Spit jocks that this is the trick I use when they start their merry-go-round impresseion. I believe the term is vector turn if I am not mistaken (Which I probably am... been a long while since I read on combat tactics)

Altamov_Steppes
09-21-2008, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:

Pay attention: IN LEVEL CO-ORDINATED TURNS

Do you think that you can fly level and coordinated at either 1 kph or in 90 deg bank?
Oh yeah... "Brilliant". Try again big shot.

BTW, how many logins you have now TrashAllOver/KT?

Oops!...you're failing on IFF besides getting shot down.
Stand to Attention! (please)...level co-ordinated flight is possible at 90 degree bank.

M_Gunz
09-21-2008, 08:31 PM
level co-ordinated flight is possible at 90 degree bank.

Not what I wrote. Turns, not flight. Always BS from you.

Kettenhunde
09-25-2008, 10:35 AM
It does Crumpp... But Shhhh, don't tell all the Spit jocks that this is the trick I use when they start their merry-go-round impresseion. I believe the term is vector turn if I am not mistaken (Which I probably am... been a long while since I read on combat tactics)


LOL, that is pretty neat that it works in your game. That is one technique used in RL. Superior agility and maneuverability is used to overcome an aircraft with a superior sustained turn ability.

All the best,

Crumpp

Bremspropeller
09-25-2008, 11:24 AM
Superior agility and maneuverability is used to overcome an aircraft with a superior sustained turn ability.


The way to go http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Blutarski2004
09-25-2008, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Afterhours:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Play with the word definitions however you want, Bank Angle determines G-loading in level turn.
Speed only determines turn radius and turn rate, not turn G's.

That's funny. So if my bank angle is 90 degrees and my speed is 1 km/hr, I will be at max Gs and my wings will break off!!!

Brilliant...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... Actually, I think you'd get a better reception on the "Crimson Skies" chat forum, or maybe "Super Mario Brothers". Your grip on adulthood, if you indeed have one, appears to be tenuous at best.

K_Freddie
09-25-2008, 04:35 PM
As mentioned before... (about the 3rd time I've posted this example - goto the DF section)
All is not what it seems to be (50MB) (http://www.vanjast.com/IL2Movies/UsAndThem.avi)

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif