PDA

View Full Version : Way to turn and bleed minimal E?



Noxx0s
03-25-2010, 02:50 PM
I'm not very familiar with aerodynamics, so what are some different ways to turn both in the horizontal and vertical that bleed little E other than just yanking the stick?

Does using rudder bleed less E? If I pull on the stick slowly will I bleed a lot less E?

M_Gunz
03-25-2010, 03:08 PM
Use the rudder to keep the ball near center. Practice turns while watching your speed and how fast
the nose comes around. If the turn rate starts slowing down then loosen up on the stick. In time
you'll have a feel for it.

AndyJWest
03-25-2010, 03:23 PM
And if you are trying to make a tight turn above your best-turn speed, climb as you start the turn, to convert momentum into height, make the turn, then dive to get the speed back if you need it. This should save a little e over a level turn, provided you don't overdo it.

TS_Sancho
03-25-2010, 03:50 PM
As Andy said, to maximize your energy potential, learn to use the vertical to turn in the horizontal.

Chandelle and high/low yo-yo's are maneuvers you want to be familiar with in this regard.

Google air combat maneuvers, there is a ton of stuff out on the web regarding ACM practice and theory.

Good luck and patience, there is no substitute for virtual air time under your virtual behind! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

DKoor
03-25-2010, 03:56 PM
Way to turn and bleed minimal E? The least energy used is when you use gentle trim assisted turns.

If you can afford not using elevator surfaces - the better.

Believe me it can be done, but not in hectic fightshttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

BillSwagger
03-25-2010, 04:13 PM
http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww99/billswagger/ccord_turn.jpg

I use trim rudder to keep the ball centered as i bank and dive. Very crucial in the energy fight.



Bill

TinyTim
03-25-2010, 04:36 PM
I know this might sound weird, but I find deploying combat flaps during high speed turns in favor of energy retention in some certain planes like Fw190 or P-47.

M_Gunz
03-26-2010, 09:07 AM
How far do you turn with them? And what speeds?

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 09:14 AM
I know this might sound weird, but I find deploying combat flaps during high speed turns in favor of energy retention in some certain planes like Fw190 or P-47.


That works because you are creating drag and as a result the airplanes velocity slows down.

The slower aircraft turns better as all aircraft at the same angle of bank and velocity make exactly the same turn.

TinyTim
03-26-2010, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
How far do you turn with them? And what speeds?

High-ish speed, 90 - 180 deg, not more.


Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I know this might sound weird, but I find deploying combat flaps during high speed turns in favor of energy retention in some certain planes like Fw190 or P-47.


That works because you are creating drag and as a result the airplanes velocity slows down.

The slower aircraft turns better as all aircraft at the same angle of bank and velocity make exactly the same turn. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I'm talking about is exactly the opposite. I *feel* that turning with combat flaps at high speeds will result in a higher exit velocity (i.e. more energy retained) compared to turning without them - in certain planes that is, when exactly the same maneouver is performed. Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

Again, this is highly subjective, I never tested these things, it's just my feeling and I might be wrong.

K_Freddie
03-26-2010, 09:53 AM
If you have to turn fast.. you 'bleed'.
Hard 'Jinking' might be a way to maximise your E, compared to a continious turn.

The BIG word is.. Depends on the situation and what you need/want to do.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Bremspropeller
03-26-2010, 10:02 AM
Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

That greatly depends on your flap-design and their L/D-ratio.

The only benefit you'll certainly get out of maneuvering-flaps is a lower corner-speed.

MikkOwl
03-26-2010, 10:26 AM
Being a bit of a newcomer to the idea of 'keeping the ball centered' as people put it, here is the information I have learned from reading real pilot manuals as well as testing.

The ball measures how the aircraft nose (heading) is compared to the air it flies through. If the ball is to either side, it means the aircraft is slipping or skidding - the nose is pointed a bit (or a lot) to either side of the air. Kind of like flying sideways or fish tailing a car through a turn instead of driving straight.

Ball centered = flying coordinated.

In gunnery, the projectiles will fly out of the muzzle at whatever angle the nose was at compared to the wind, just like when using a turret. If one shoots in any direction but straight forward the projectiles will have a lot of side wind. And side wind affects projectiles no matter if fired from a rifle on the ground or fixed/mounted weapon in the air. In gunnery, not having the ball centered will make them arc out in the direction your nose was facing away from the direction of travel.

In flight/aerodynamics, centering the ball at all times is to fly coordinated. "Coordinated turns" etc. An aircraft viewed from the front or rear shows that they have almost no area seen - the cross sections are tiny. This is a necessity to be able to fly through the air without too much drag slowing it down. If the aircraft was flying a bit sideways through the air, then the cross section would be a lot larger and the air would also not flow as intended over all the surfaces. Both leading to a lot of drag, slowing the aircraft.

Coordinated turns:

Whenever the ailerons are used, the side that flips 'down' (the one on the wing opposite to direction you are rolling) causes more drag than the inside aileron. Asymmetric drag = the aircraft yaws, as if the rudder was being used. Stick held to the right makes the aircraft yaw to the left, for as long as the stick is held. Effect is worse the larger the stick movement. Vice versa is true, stick left = yaw to right.

This must be cancelled out by a bit of rudder into the same direction one is rolling. Took some practice to find out how much one needs and how it works. I used too much, not enough.. For the Bf 110 G-2 and a few other planes I found that on average just a minor amount of rudder is needed (maybe 20-25% at max aileron deflection). Any less aileron use, even less rudder needed. As most combat turns tend to be violent rolls, it is not hard to get a feel for that minor amount of rudder needed. Flying coordinated turns is really using the controls coordinated. Match the stick position to left or right with the corresponding amount of left or right rudder.

When the desired bank is established the stick is centered again (no ailerons) and so is the rudder. Some aircraft with dihadredal(? V-shaped) wings need some aileron input to keep the desired level of bank, and that means having to keep a bit of corresponding rudder.

______

Other energy savings is to fly lightly loaded, make light turns, keep radiator closed (as it should be), don't use flaps, shoot less (slows you down a little little, haha - can affect things if chasing someone running away). Any kind of control surface usage causes drag, even rolling. Learning the most efficient engine settings for flying with the radiator closed. This can include lower RPM (coarser propeller pitch) and lower manifold boost pressure (helps a lot as seen from people learning this from the P-51, flying faster with lower settings than with throttle maxed with WEP). Plan the flight and maneuvering in a way that will help reduce required turns, especially avoiding the harder turns.

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 12:37 PM
I *feel* that turning with combat flaps at high speeds will result in a higher exit velocity

If that is true in your game, then the physics is not of this earth. I don't think that is the case.

There is no such thing as "bleeding" energy or "energy retention" in aircraft performance either. Those concepts are not useful for understanding how airplanes work. The airplane can sustain performance or it cannot sustain performance. If it cannot sustain the performance, then it must trade altitude or airspeed in order to achieve the desired performance.


Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

This is not correct.

The way flaps work is the first few degrees give a large increase to lift coefficient for a smaller proportional increase in drag coefficient.

It is smaller proportional increase in drag compared to full flaps but still an increase over flaps retracted.

TinyTim
03-26-2010, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

This is not correct.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the IL-2 Sturmovik sim or in reality? I was refering to the sim, and even this to just a couple specific planes.

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 12:41 PM
In the IL-2 Sturmovik sim or in reality? I was refering to the sim.

I knew that, I am speaking of real airplanes and do not dispute any information about your game.

I would be careful and find a way to measure it in your game if I was you guys.

TinyTim
03-26-2010, 12:43 PM
Yes, I agree it's probably not how it's supposed to be. Plus - again - it's just my feeling and could very well be wrong.

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 12:46 PM
Maybe you are not wrong. That is why I would check it.

BillSwagger
03-26-2010, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
What I'm talking about is exactly the opposite. I *feel* that turning with combat flaps at high speeds will result in a higher exit velocity (i.e. more energy retained) compared to turning without them - in certain planes that is, when exactly the same maneouver is performed. Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

Again, this is highly subjective, I never tested these things, it's just my feeling and I might be wrong.

I get the impression the plane is lifted through the turn as opposed to pulled through the turn. I think the amount of speed loss has more to do with the velocity at which you enter the turn, but being that i also use combat flaps to prevent over shooting i think they do slow you down more.

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 12:50 PM
I get the impression the plane is lifted through the turn as opposed to pulled through the turn.


Actually usable angle of attack will decrease when you deploy flaps. What you are probably "feeling" is the fact radius will decrease to a point and rate will increase.

M_Gunz
03-26-2010, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
How far do you turn with them? And what speeds?

High-ish speed, 90 - 180 deg, not more.


Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I know this might sound weird, but I find deploying combat flaps during high speed turns in favor of energy retention in some certain planes like Fw190 or P-47.


That works because you are creating drag and as a result the airplanes velocity slows down.

The slower aircraft turns better as all aircraft at the same angle of bank and velocity make exactly the same turn. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I'm talking about is exactly the opposite. I *feel* that turning with combat flaps at high speeds will result in a higher exit velocity (i.e. more energy retained) compared to turning without them - in certain planes that is, when exactly the same maneouver is performed. Without flaps you will achieve higher AoA and consequently slow down more than with combat flaps deployed.

Again, this is highly subjective, I never tested these things, it's just my feeling and I might be wrong. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Make an ntrk with a few turns each way then check speed loss in playback when that's all you have to do. You'll know.

K_Freddie
03-26-2010, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I get the impression the plane is lifted through the turn as opposed to pulled through the turn.
Actually usable angle of attack will decrease when you deploy flaps. What you are probably "feeling" is the fact radius will decrease to a point and rate will increase. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Maybe you should mention the lift vector resulting from the increase AoA with deploying flaps. There is no need to use extra elevator at this point.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

M_Gunz
03-26-2010, 06:25 PM
Flaps decrease the aspect ratio of the wing and raise the AOI, which if you hold the nose steady
raises your AOA. More lift at lower lift:drag.

AndyJWest
03-26-2010, 06:43 PM
I don't think most flap types on IL-2 sim aircraft affect wing area, so aspect ratio won't change, M_G. The only exception I can think of is one of the Japanese fighters, where the flaps extend backwards...

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 07:21 PM
Flaps decrease the aspect ratio

Who is telling you this nonsense?

Flaps have no effect on AR in general.

Only one design of flaps, Fowler Flaps, does that and nothing in the LE flap department was used in WWII.


which if you hold the nose steady
raises your AOA.

That is not correct either. Your camber is increased and the AOI is changed. The effect is to lower the usable AOA for the wing but raise the CL. This allows the nose to come down so the pilot can see the runway while maintaining the CL required to fly at slower landing velocities.


By increasing the camber of an airfoil, the coefficient of lift for a given angle of attack is increased. Contrary to popular belief, the stalling angle of attack when flaps are extended is less than when flaps are retracted. A wing will stall when the airstream doesn't have sufficient energy to make the required change in direction to follow the camber of the wing. The greater the camber, the greater the required change of direction. The increased camber with flaps extended puts a greater demand on the airstream to change direction. The increased demand reduces the critical angle of attack. If you are thinking that you learned a wing always stalls at the same angle of attack, you should note that this is true for a given airfoil section. When flaps are extended, the airfoil section is changed as is the stalling angle of attack.

http://www.erau.edu/er/newsmedia/articles/wp1.html

JtD
03-26-2010, 07:42 PM
TinyTim is 50% correct, the Fw retains E better with combat flaps deployed than without. Afaik, this is considered a bug (since it's wrong) and might be changed in the future. P-47 does not retain E better with flaps deployed, il2-compare is fairly close to in game physics here.

Then it not always best to use gentle control input, in particular in pull outs at high speed. Being gentle would cost a lot of extra alt, which is more than made up for with a rapid pull out. That leaves you at a slower speed at higher altitude, but overall considerably more E. But of course in general the advice is absolutely right and probably one of the major points that separates less experienced from veteran players.

Generally it is advisable to do the turns at a lower speed, where you create less drag for the same turn rate and therefore don't lose as much E. In practice it means that you should try to climb a bit before turning. so the speed goes down but the E is conserved, and dive again after you finished your turn, to get your speed back up.

And, of course, don't turn too much in the first place!

BillSwagger
03-26-2010, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I get the impression the plane is lifted through the turn as opposed to pulled through the turn.


Actually usable angle of attack will decrease when you deploy flaps. What you are probably "feeling" is the fact radius will decrease to a point and rate will increase. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right, and the impression or feeling is that the wing is lifting the aircraft through the turn, as oppose to using elevator authority where there is a sense of dropping the tail to increase AoA.


I would think the latter to be more efficient in terms of performance, but getting more out of the turn with out stalling seems to require flaps.

i know in real life there is probably a different feel that you get from using flaps in turns because the nose tends to want to pitch down on low wing aircraft. That probably depends on the degree of flaps being used as well as the design of the aircraft.



Bill

MikkOwl
03-26-2010, 07:58 PM
That is what I had been thinking about the flaps - if they droop the rear part of the wing down, the air flowing over the top seems to have a trickier time making it across.

But also is there not a difference between 'nose goes down and can't come up due to lift not being enough' (airflow being able to flow over wing all the way, properly, but the lift is not enough) and 'nose down and won't come up due to airflow corrupted over wing'. The former not experiencing buffeting while the latter does. Flaps, after all, permit flying much slower level than when flying without flaps and just pitching nose up to maintain angle of attack (sure to lead to buffeting if flown slow enough). This should logically be the main use of flaps rather than being able to fly nose down more, although both effects are desirable.

Also, to put it straight, flaps pretty much just redirect air to blow downwards instead of passing by more rearwards don't they? More lift yes, and since air was redirected (and struck the rearward facing surface of the flaps) = drag penalty at any degree of flap usage.

If flaps operate like I thought they did (redirecting air down) then it should explain why the aircraft trims upwards - the flaps are forward of the rear horizontal stabilizers. If the front part of the airplane increases its lift while the rear does not, it follows that the nose would rise.

EDIT:

As for if using combat flaps is better or not to retain energy should be answered by looking at IL-2 compare graphs. They do list them with and without flaps. Common to most aircraft is that using flaps cause the fastest sustainable turn rate to be only marginally higher, the biggest difference being that the turning can be done at lower speed. The ratio seems to indicate that the gain in turn is less than the penalty in drag (gets worse the more flap angle used). Summarily aircraft should in general retain their energy better without flaps, and that combat flap usage is for maximising the turn rate per second beyond what can be achieved without flaps. At great energy expense.

Kettenhunde
03-26-2010, 08:04 PM
Generally it is advisable to do the turns at a lower speed,

Why?

Performance is either sustained or not sustained.

If the performance is sustained, then you are much better off turning at high velocity.

Unless you are at maximum rate, you can get the exact same rate of turn at a high velocity as opposed to a lower velocity.

You will have a much higher Specific excess power which means greater options to maneuver in the dogfight.

If the performance is not sustained then the aircraft cannot maintain it and it represents an instant in time as the forces acting on the aircraft are moving towards its sustainable envelope.

M_Gunz
03-26-2010, 09:34 PM
If it's not sustainable then you bleed speed until it is. Better to zoom until you are at sustainable velocity,
make your turn and drop back down to recover speed.

JtD, what happens to AOA if you drop flaps and hold the nose high, huh? Drop flaps, trailing edge is lowered,
chord is steepened, hold the nose up and AOA is?

BillSwagger
03-27-2010, 01:57 AM
Originally posted by MikkOwl:

If flaps operate like I thought they did (redirecting air down) then it should explain why the aircraft trims upwards - the flaps are forward of the rear horizontal stabilizers. If the front part of the airplane increases its lift while the rear does not, it follows that the nose would rise.


The airplane may rise but i always thought flaps changed the center of lift which could cause the nose to pitch forward depending on how much you use.

Bill

na85
03-27-2010, 01:58 AM
Flaps alter the camber of the wing, but they do indeed cause a change in pitching moment.

JtD
03-27-2010, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:

JtD, what happens to AOA if you drop flaps and hold the nose high, huh? Drop flaps, trailing edge is lowered,
chord is steepened, hold the nose up and AOA is?

According to common definition, if you keep the pitch of the plane and just lower flaps, the AoA does not change, though I admit it is debatable as the trailing edge does indeed come down.
If you follow this definition, dropping flaps will increase your lift and drag for the same AoA, it will also give you a higher clmax, but it will lower your AoA max.

Kettenhunde
03-27-2010, 03:04 AM
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/7467/stheoryagain.jpg (http://img243.imageshack.us/i/stheoryagain.jpg/)

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/6381/flapbasics.jpg (http://img265.imageshack.us/i/flapbasics.jpg/)

Kettenhunde
03-27-2010, 06:21 AM
According to common definition, if you keep the pitch of the plane and just lower flaps, the AoA does not change,

Can you point out this definition? A link or source perhaps? I can't find it in a single academic reference.

Bremspropeller
03-27-2010, 06:56 AM
He's referring to keepng the same pitch-attitude while dropping flaps.

While for an infinitesimal amount of time, AoA will stay the same, the increase in CL will force the aircraft to climb (pitch-attitude still frozen), thus decreasing AoA.

Kettenhunde
03-27-2010, 10:49 AM
While for an infinitesimal amount of time, AoA will stay the same, the increase in CL will force the aircraft to climb (pitch-attitude still frozen), thus decreasing AoA.


Hi Brems,

When you deploy flaps, the condition of flight is no longer sustainable and the aircraft will move to a sustainable condition of flight. That does not make the statement a correct general characteristic nor does it become "a common definition".

That statement is just someone trying to appear more educated than they are on the topic or who has been misinformed:


JtD says:
According to common definition, if you keep the pitch of the plane and just lower flaps, the AoA does not change,

That is like saying the common definition of a WWII fighters turn is a 9G turn. It is just not correct.


Note that the flapped section will stall at a lower aoa than the unflapped section.

http://www.auf.asn.au/groundsc.../umodule4.html#flaps (http://www.auf.asn.au/groundschool/umodule4.html#flaps)

You know what means when you sum the section coefficients, right?

M_Gunz
03-27-2010, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
He's referring to keepng the same pitch-attitude while dropping flaps.

While for an infinitesimal amount of time, AoA will stay the same, the increase in CL will force the aircraft to climb (pitch-attitude still frozen), thus decreasing AoA.

I see what you mean, the change in path changes the AOA.

M_Gunz
03-27-2010, 11:29 AM
Note that the flapped section will stall at a lower aoa than the unflapped section.

Like what is shown by Fig. 4.14. Effect of a camber change on the Cl -alpha curve?

Noxx0s
03-27-2010, 01:54 PM
Yeah I know about the ball and keeping it centered, and obviously turning hard will bleed more E than a slow turn, I was just wondering I guess if there were any "tricks". (apart from the yoyo which I'm already familiar with and use all the time---great maneuver!)

M_Gunz
03-27-2010, 02:44 PM
Use gravity, use the vertical and roll to change direction rather than 'turn'.
Use wingovers and loops and split-esses. Use barrel rolls and exit to change
direction. The choices of alternate to flat turning are many.

Kettenhunde
03-27-2010, 04:02 PM
Like what is shown by Fig. 4.14. Effect of a camber change on the Cl -alpha curve?

Exactly.

Noxx0s
03-27-2010, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Use gravity, use the vertical and roll to change direction rather than 'turn'.
Use wingovers and loops and split-esses. Use barrel rolls and exit to change
direction. The choices of alternate to flat turning are many.

Is turning in the vertical (or just "pulling up" I guess) more energy efficient?

M_Gunz
03-27-2010, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by IcyScythe:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Use gravity, use the vertical and roll to change direction rather than 'turn'.
Use wingovers and loops and split-esses. Use barrel rolls and exit to change
direction. The choices of alternate to flat turning are many.

Is turning in the vertical (or just "pulling up" I guess) more energy efficient? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Depending on your speed and height and tactical situation you may rather go down or up.

Try some flying practice with no combat to see what you can do and improve what you can do.
When you depart from horizontal flying even 20 or 30 degrees you change the effect of gravity
on your flight to a significant degree simply by not having gravity pull directly across your
flight path.
So you are going faster than your highest/best sustained turn IAS, pull up into a shallow or
medium climb and before your speed gets down to sustained turn IAS make your turn on the tilted
flat so that at the top your should be at sustained turn IAS maybe 320-400 kph depending on the
plane. If you start just over that IAS then you won't have to go far and if you start well over
then use a steeper zoom or just a half-loop upward with a roll at the mid-point to set your
direction on exit from the loop.
If you are not much over best turn IAS or less then try banking for the turn and dropping into
a shallow dive for half the turn then bring the nose back up to finish it. As you drop your
wings don't have to make as much lift (same as in a zoom climb, wing lift only needs to oppose
gravity pulling -across- your flight path and by leaving the horizontal you decrease the need)
at the same time as you are trading height for speed. You are 'unloading your wings' which
reduces your drag due to lift and that -lets you turn harder or turn the same with less drag-.

Going up and turning on a tilt is basically a wingover even if it's not a perfect aerobatic
example and going down then rising... they call that a low yoyo (why not just a low-yo?) here.
Neither is as quick or potentially as efficient as pointing up or down steeply and rolling
onto a new direction but both are combat-efficient with plenty of options to change to suit
what's going on in a changing fight. Your goal in practice is to make these moves second
nature to 1) be good about it and 2) make it easy to quickly think about in a tactical way
when you are in combat and actually have a good chance of knowing how it will come out.

Practice whole 360's 'on the tilt' in any plane to see best speeds at different altitudes and
how tradeoffs between speed and turn rate serve you. Usually you want to gain angle near the
top end and try 'riding the edge' where if you pull a bit harder it bleeds badly on the lower
part. Keep your speed up. Along with not flying straight you will be harder to hit.

Remember it's only one tactical tool and none fit all situations. You want to be as good as
you can when you use it. The more 'tools/tricks' you have down to where you don't need to
spend time thinking to use, the better you will be in combat. If you find yourself up against
a better pilot online then start recording a track so you can see what he uses against you,
maybe you will find a new tool or maybe find where you didn't react but you should gain clues
to be better afterwards.

BillSwagger
03-27-2010, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by IcyScythe:

Is turning in the vertical (or just "pulling up" I guess) more energy efficient?


My opinion is that its not more efficient, but instead what you are doing is trading energy for altitude and gaining advantage. This is all more dependent on the situation and your entry speed.

It is not typical to see a world war 2 fighter that is capable of a steep dive from a specific altitude and a specific speed, down to another altitude and then zoom climb back up to the original start altitude and have more speed, in fact, usually you will have less speed.

There are special circumstances where if the dive is shallow and enough energy is built in time because the engine power is also adding energy, the climb can exceed original height and maintain the same speed, but we are only talking 500-1000meters in such a case. Usually, the vertical is an energy eater but i look it more as a trade for speed or altitude. You can't have both.


Bill

WTE_Galway
03-27-2010, 10:21 PM
Another factor to consider is whether the aircraft has leading edge slats. Slats allow you to pull lead very effectively for short periods and historically led to tactics with aircraft like the bf109 that effectively resulted in "egg shaped" combat turns with alternating slow (slats deployed) and fast (slats closed) sections.

By the way the p38 historically had Fowler Flaps I am not sure how well they are simulated in game.

ibeagle
03-28-2010, 04:27 AM
Lag pursuit

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/7303/lagpursuit.jpg (http://img180.imageshack.us/i/lagpursuit.jpg/)

Offensive maneuver. Key thing here is you fly a greater distance, but turning gentler keeps your speed higher so you can match your opponents rate of turn. Say you're in a Wildcat closing on a Zero and you have speed advantage. You know that if you get suckered into a slow turning fight you're dead. You know you can't match the radius of turn of the zero, but you can match it's rate of turn under certain conditions. The zero turns and starts to bleed speed. You pull a gentler turn outside his turn but retain your speed. This gives you options, you can reverse direction and disengage safely with superior speed. In many cases online against humans you can see that the zero has turned too tight and lost too much e. Make a judgment call on pulling a tight e-bleeding turn for a kill, or a high yoyo might give you position as well. Main idea here is that you've preserved your energy advantage at the end of the turn.
Also useful for preserving position if your overtake speed is too high for an initial shot.