PDA

View Full Version : Roll vs Turn rate



tigertalon
05-03-2007, 02:00 PM
Yeah it depends greatly on what you'r flying (improving roll on 190 or turn rate on Ki-27 doesn't make much sense does it) but still, for general air combat, which one do you think is more important? Or, hypothetically, if a patch would be released that improves one of the two for, say 10%, for every flyable plane in game, which one'd you pick?

My personal opinion is they are quite close in importance, even more important than turn rate probably is E-bleed rate during turning and the speed dependance of turn rate. For me almost a toss of a coin, still, in most of the occasions I would go for roll rate.

With good roll rate one can roll out of sight of persuing enemy, with favourable bleed added it can outscissor better turning chasing opponent.

ploughman
05-03-2007, 02:03 PM
Instantaneous turn. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
05-03-2007, 02:20 PM
I was watching a documentry today and they had a Supermarine engineer who was talking.

He said they gave the Spitfire power assisted ailerons, and at that point they were talkign baout the MkVIII and MKIX. I had never heard that before? Which marks had these powered ailerons?

Oh and about the poll, both can be put to good use. If I had the faster plane then I would pick roll rate, but in the slower plane I would pick turn rate. You MUST be able to outurn him if you cannot outrun him.

carguy_
05-03-2007, 03:53 PM
Well for me the answer is very simple.Turn rate for sure.IMO to use the roll rate effectively you must have experience and far greater flying skills.

Now it`s obvious that as armchair pilot I know this only from a game.In this game,when my opponent used his roll was when he made scissors.Everytime if he got away from me was my fault because I could not hit a plane that was maneuvering left/right just in front of my gunsight.But hitting such an opponent is a lot easier than pulling an angle on a plane that forces you to pull excessive AoA in exchange for a CHANCE of hitting him.


IMO a best plane is a plane that is a jack of all trades.The IL2 version of FW190 would have a huge advantage in roll IF it could pull a high angle fast turn,at high speed ofcourse.In IL2 you can`t do that because the plane shudders.If only FW190 had elevators of P51...

Other side of the coin is that I never got to using Focke Wulf`s roll rate to its best potential.
Like I said,the Spit gets on my six@460km/h,I make few fast changes of direction but can`t possibly pull even a second of an angle that would make him lose me from his sight,because this plane really does not accept any kind of hard stick movement(shudders,eventually snap stall).So after 5-6 scissors and rough turns I end up slow with a Spit still glued on my six waiting for his shells to pop me open.

My opinion is that at least in this game,you can`t put a great roll rate into a good defensive use.

I`d pick a 10% turn rate increase in a G6 above everything else.
You see,in a 109 that has slats I do scissors and pull a high AoA and IMMEDIATELY the Spit falls in front of my gunsight.I can do that several times in a row and the Spit pilot gets a sweating shirt too.
Why?

Because the 109 can do everything good.I can couple a few moves into one evil surprise on the Spit.In this case a good roll rate,even bad roll rate at high speeds does not cripple the 109.Heck,go fly the Lavochkin some time!Do you see its bad roll rate giving you problems?


Summing up,as an armchair virtual pilot I do not even compare the value of better turn rate vs better roll rate.I doubt that roll rate is any kind of advantage at all.


PS.Maybe I say this because what I really like in a plane,is defensive qualities.109 has good offensive and good defensive Qs.The Focke Wulf has huge offensive and no defensive Qs.
For me a plane which can`t get out of trouble by itself is a pile of junk.

Xiolablu3
05-03-2007, 03:59 PM
Interesting post Carguy.

Try diving when you get a Spit on your tail in a FW190, I know a lot of people whine about dive speeds, but it works very well for me.

The sooner you see him coming the better, but certainly as soon as I see tracer or hear hit I will flip over (fast roll rate) and dive. As I am in the dive I will keep altering roll a little so he cannot get a good lead on me, but I dont lose any speed from altering roll. If he is not really really close then you should escape.


Of course this only works when you have altitude. I always try and keep around 3000m and if I go lower make sure that I am keeping very very fast. This way I can dive if I get into trouble.

Henkie327
05-03-2007, 04:14 PM
I like planes that can do both good.

But maybe roll rate is more important. Because roll rate can be used to "replace" turnrate.

For example, a pilot who is diving vertically can use roll rate to change direction faster than the plane (even if it is a plane with a really fast turn rate) that is turning in a flat circle below him. Not only that, but the diving plane can also turn (roll) inside the other planes turn, with a much smaller turncircle.

Clipper_51
05-03-2007, 05:42 PM
Mustang - turns great at hi speed, rolls well at high speed. None better!

Viper2005_
05-03-2007, 05:42 PM
Roll rate doesn't matter. Turn rate doesn't matter.

What matters is having an advantage over your opponent.

If you give me a 10% advantage in turn rate then that's still an advantage.

Even if I roll at 360º/s, I'm still at a disadvantage to an enemy capable of rolling at 400º/s.

***

In the context of IL2 there are two turn regimes.

High Speed
Any speed above the 6 g corner speed is a high speed turn; instantaneous turn rate is limited by blackout rather than aerodynamics.

Low Speed
Any speed below the 6 g corner speed is a low speed turn; instantaneous turn rate is limited by aerodynamics rather than physiology.

Now, in the high speed regime, I'm not interested in turn rate anymore; I've got that (unless perhaps I'm flying a 109 or something). Instead I'm after a reduced energy bleed.

In the low speed regime, I'm after more turn rate as well as less energy bleed. That means more lift, as well as less drag.

(I make no distinction between sustained and instantaneous turns because reality doesn't care if you're losing energy, gaining energy or maintaining the same energy state. It's often very hard to tell in a fight anyway; a few knots here, a few feet there and who knows?)

Now, in the low speed regime, an improvement in turn rate generally implies more wing area (more lift) and more span (less induced drag). The flip side is that this new wing generally implies a reduced roll rate and a reduced top speed. Hence the traditional divide between the T&B fighter and the B&Z fighter.

In the high speed regime the rules are different; since you've got all the lift you need, it's all about thrust & drag (and maybe elevator authority if you're in a 109). Improved high speed turn performance doesn't necessarily impact roll rate & level speed in the same way as low speed turn performance.

Roll rate may be similarly divided into low speed & high speed regimes.

High Speed
Roll rate limited by pilot strength. Therefore improvements may be made by either reducing control forces or increasing pilot strength. Quite surprising improvements may be made by tweaking control surface design, especially the hinges.

Low Speed
Roll rate limited by control authority with full deflection. Improvements may most easily be made by making the control bigger, and possibly by reducing wing span.

The distinction between the low & high speed regimes is important since in both cases the B&Z fighter should operate in the high speed regime, whilst the T&B fighter should operate in the low speed regime.

Personally, I fly the Fw-190 more than anything else. I therefore live in the high speed regime and die in the low speed regime. Now, my first priority is performance in the high speed regime. But once I have a substantial advantage over my opponent, as I would do in speed & roll against a Hurricane for example, I'd rather have extra turn rate than extra speed or roll rate.

In short, horses for courses. But overall, IMO speed is life, so I'd generally prefer roll rate to turn rate...

AKA_TAGERT
05-03-2007, 06:34 PM
roll rate is relative

Now say it 3 times fast

BOA_Allmenroder
05-03-2007, 07:02 PM
In real life you can't turn an aircraft unless you roll it first. The quicker you get into your roll, the sooner you'll turn.

Nimits
05-03-2007, 08:44 PM
I'll take roll rate over turn rate/radius any day. Air combat is about manuvering in three dimensions. Superior roll rate allows you to intiate or change manuevers faster than your opponent. Used properly, it can overcome a turn rate/radius advantage temporarily, and by the time the superior turning aircraft is finally able to use its advantage, you've switched maneuvers or planes of maneuver, forcing him to start all over again.

BaldieJr
05-03-2007, 08:56 PM
Turn-rate attraction is the earmark of a true target. Although I've mastered the notorious defensive planes, I really have out grown them.

I'd rather be in a superior roller. I enjoy taking the offensive and being able to engage/disengage at will, and with the precision of an Ace.

DKoor
05-03-2007, 09:10 PM
If we aren't talking about extremes, then turn rate for me.
10% better turn for 190 or 47? Not bad..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

tigertalon
05-04-2007, 03:17 AM
Hmmm, maybe the settings you usually play on online should be stated as well. I spend most of my time on either full switch or UKD2 (externals on, cockpit on). The more realistic settings, the less important is turn and the more important is roll IMO.

Carguy, one very important fact is not mentioned in your post: if a spit is on my tail (Fw190), I can use my superior roll to simply dive out below his nose and he temporarily looses sight on me! This fact is very important on full switch servers, obviously useless on externals on. On arcade servers, scissors do not have a potential they do on arcade servers.

Real german 190 tactics when persued by a spit was combining two advantages 190 had over spit: roll rate and dive acceleration. It was to perform a half roll in one direction - spit tries to follow -, then performing a full roll in the opposite direction - spit again tries follow and reverses its slower roll. By the time 190 is flyin inversed again, spit is about level. 190 dives immediately under the spits nose, and spit still has to perform a half roll before he can dive after the 190. Considering 190 had a dive acceleration advantage over spit, a 190 driver was already sipping coffee in his airbase canteen when a spit driver pulled out of his dive.

Ratsack
05-04-2007, 04:06 AM
Why hasn't Josf appeared in this thread yet?

Ratsack

DKoor
05-04-2007, 04:21 AM
Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hmmm, maybe the settings you usually play on online should be stated as well. WarClouds?

I spend most of my time on either full switch or UKD2 (externals on, cockpit on). The more realistic settings, the less important is turn and the more important is roll IMO. Hell no. Just give me more turn in 190! 190 as it is, rolls really good, but that wont stop me from being shot down most of the times when Tempest or 47 chases me around. If you "give me" 10% I could probably outturn them in 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif although fuel level plays important part too.

On the other hand you can check some Spits on WarClouds. Try to escape them by rolling on higher speed. If you don't have enough alt to catch up some speed you'll probably check the Earth DM really fast http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Roll is just piss poor maneuver compared to turn either offensive or defensive.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 04:59 AM
IMO turn is a piss poor defensive manover, u still present a predictable target that a good shot has no trouble hitting and bleeds too much energy that u cant immediatly go on the attack if u survive.

The faster the speed the easyer it is to exploit a roll advantage.


Hell no. Just give me more turn in 190! 190 as it is, rolls really good, but that wont stop me from being shot down most of the times when Tempest or 47 chases me around. If you "give me" 10% I could probably outturn them in 190 Big Grin although fuel level plays important part too.

thats because tempest and p51 both have very good roll rates at the speeds it matters.

Rolling around like an idiot like most ppl do isnt an effective approach. The best way to learn how to use it, is fly in a slow rolling plane vs a fast one. Or even just against ace ai and those crazy manovers they do on defensive bloody hard to hit :P

DKoor
05-04-2007, 05:07 AM
Just for the heck of it;

Originally posted by HellToupee:
IMO turn is a piss poor defensive manover, u still present a predictable target that a good shot has no trouble hitting and bleeds too much energy that u cant immediatly go on the attack if u survive. Show me the track - which Spitfire evaded your attack by outrolling you? I guess no one of those idiots flying Spitfires realized the great advantage of roll, they always try to evade by turn. Morons!

The faster the speed the easyer it is to exploit a roll advantage. Compared to...?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Hell no. Just give me more turn in 190! 190 as it is, rolls really good, but that wont stop me from being shot down most of the times when Tempest or 47 chases me around. If you "give me" 10% I could probably outturn them in 190 Big Grin although fuel level plays important part too.

thats because tempest and p51 both have very good roll rates at the speeds it matters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Never mentioned the P-51, but it's ok http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Actually 47 and Tempest will outturn you, and if you can't outrun them, then you must die. Plain and simple. Unless... well the guy in 47 or Tempest is a moron.

Rolling around like an idiot like most ppl do isnt an effective approach. The best way to learn how to use it, is fly in a slow rolling plane vs a fast one. Or even just against ace ai and those crazy manovers they do on defensive bloody hard to hit :P Like I said to you all who have such smart ideas; go ahead roll, scissor around in your 190 vs Spitfires and see where it will get you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Just for the heck of it;

Show me the track - which Spitfire evaded your attack by outrolling you? I guess no one of those idiots flying Spitfires realized the great advantage of roll, they always try to evade by turn. Morons!

i can show many where they didnt evade successfully in turning. Same with zeros vs 47s just yesterday 109 tried to evade my mosquito by turning got him to. Really its down to shooting ability it works vs poor shots alright but not good ones. Just rolling does not avoid u getting hit, also the spitfire does not outroll the 190, so trying to use rolling moves vs a superior rolling plane is like trying to outturn a superior turning plane.



Never mentioned the P-51, but it's ok http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Actually 47 and Tempest will outturn you, and if you can't outrun them, then you must die. Plain and simple. Unless... well the guy in 47 or Tempest is a moron.


well 47 51 both similar http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Well the p47 has no great turning advantage, ild easly outturn one with the d9, if i cant outrun them i would drawn them into a sissor fight, at low speeds the tempest dosnt roll as well and is at a disadvantage in the sissors, if not then the 190 pilot is a moron.



Like I said to you all who have such smart ideas; go ahead roll, scissor around in your 190 vs Spitfires and see where it will get you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

usually gets me home, rolling alone dosnt do it, u must use it to change direction at the right moments, eg pull into a turn the chasing plane pulls hard for diflection and he cant see you roll into the opposite direction and u gone before he notices. At high speeds vs a full wing spit, just a tiny bit of elevator with roll gets u away.

DKoor
05-04-2007, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
i can show many where they didnt evade successfully in turning. WoW! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif You can show many where they are turning and out of those some where they are failing in their attempt and thus being destroyed. If I understand you right.
But you can't show ONE where your target Spitfire or Zero is deliberately evading by roll? Pffffttt... You are flying Vs n00bs I tell you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Same with zeros vs 47s just yesterday 109 tried to evade my mosquito by turning got him to. I tend to agree. If he didn't turn, if he rolled, he would have survived. Moron!

Really its down to shooting ability it works vs poor shots alright but not good ones. Yes must be that, and they are turning too! Morons don't know that is piss poor evasive tactic!

Just rolling does not avoid u getting hit, also the spitfire does not outroll the 190, so trying to use rolling moves vs a superior rolling plane is like trying to outturn a superior turning plane. Then roll your ******* 47 vs Zero!!! That must work I tell you! Zero can't roll for **** http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif You can do it, you can outroll him!

well 47 51 both similar http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Must be if you say so.

Well the p47 has no great turning advantage, ild easly outturn one with the d9, Roger that

if i cant outrun them i would drawn them into a sissor fight, at low speeds the tempest dosnt roll as well and is at a disadvantage in the sissors, if not then the 190 pilot is a moron. Yes, yes it's about roll. You convinced me. That is why you should avoid mixing it up in your Tempest Vs nasty FW-190's on deck. Don't do it - they'll outscissor you!
Also pass that information to the Spitfire flyers too, please convince them too!

usually gets me home, rolling alone dosnt do it, u must use it to change direction at the right moments, eg pull into a turn the chasing plane pulls hard for diflection and he cant see you roll into the opposite direction and u gone before he notices. At high speeds vs a full wing spit, just a tiny bit of elevator with roll gets u away. This makes sense.

WWSpinDry
05-04-2007, 07:09 AM
Since it's a truism in the real Air Force that "Rate kills," I'll vote for turn rate over roll rate, even though both are important.

WWSensei
05-04-2007, 07:39 AM
As Spinny said. The axiom is "Rate kills". Roll is important because it lets you initiate turns faster.

There can be lots of posts and discussions and charts and arguments, but as someone who has been there-done that I can tell you that between the two only the turn rate matters.

Blutarski2004
05-04-2007, 07:40 AM
Originally posted by Nimits:
I'll take roll rate over turn rate/radius any day. Air combat is about manuvering in three dimensions. Superior roll rate allows you to intiate or change manuevers faster than your opponent. Used properly, it can overcome a turn rate/radius advantage temporarily, and by the time the superior turning aircraft is finally able to use its advantage, you've switched maneuvers or planes of maneuver, forcing him to start all over again.


..... IIRC, that is what Boyd concluded - that the ability to rapidly transition from one flight maneuver to another was a very important factor in judging the combat ability of a fighter aircraft. A high roll-rate enables a fighter to make those fast transitions.

stalkervision
05-04-2007, 08:03 AM
look into the p-47 and Robert Johnson and what a really good pilot in a superior rolling aircraft can do. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

also the fw-190..

DKoor
05-04-2007, 08:09 AM
Yet again, this forum has excelled in inventing the new hot water for the umpteenth time!

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 08:14 AM
..... IIRC, that is what Boyd concluded - that the ability to rapidly transition from one flight maneuver to another was a very important factor in judging the combat ability of a fighter aircraft. A high roll-rate enables a fighter to make those fast transitions.

You can refresh your memory no?

Fast Transients (http://www.d-n-i.net/boyd/pdf/fast_transients.pdf)


In other words, suggests a fighter that can be used to initiate and control engagement opportunities yet has a fast transient ("natural hook") that can be used to either force an overshoot by an attacker or stay inside a hard turning defender.

If you read the link it may become clear that in Boyd's era the roll axis was no longer a problem for some reason (perhaps the airplanes were no longer made very light with huge wings designed for slow speed handling?).

As early as the Korean War when F-86s were energy fighting against the Mig-15 the relative roll rates were, possibly, a non-factor where roll rates at those higher speeds were on par with each other.

We went through all this before and it need not be regurgitated in this thread.

In the real world during WWII the factor of a roll rate advantage is clearly known and reported by Robert Shaw in his book Fighter Combat when he provides the example illustrated in a Mock dog-fight between Robert S. Johnson and a British pilot. The P-47, in Johnson's words: "I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me."

Boyd was refereeing to a "natural hook' Fast Transient during energy fighting when the end game is accomplished by dumping energy (energy bleed) during a maximum performance turn (the faster the plane can slow down the faster will be the turn rate and the smaller will be the DECREASING radius or hook turn or the end game follows a FAST TRANSIENT where the energy fighter forces an overshoot using the advantage in dumping energy faster (energy bleed).

In the game the game doesn't model a two to one roll rate advantage for any plane and the fast transient (energy dumping) isn't modeled as an advantage in turn rate or radius during the dumping because planes in the game simply take a long time to start turning (dumping as they take a long time to start turning) players can see this if they test for relative instantaneous turn performance or not. I'm not the authority on the subject even if you repeatedly claim that I am.

Boyd explains more about Fast Transients while explaining Fighter Combat in his Aerial Attack Study. Of particular importance (even for the game) is the section on forcing overshoots. There he explains how all the forces involved combine to limit what can be done and what cannot be done in reality. The game is a game I get that part.

I didn't answer the poll. Any advantage is better than none.

RegRag1977
05-04-2007, 08:20 AM
I agree, but Robert Johnson was an ace...

Superiority against other pilots do make the difference: if you're alone, roll or turn rate won't help much against one of those UberExperten.

We have to remember, even if it hurts some, that aces online are as rare, in proportion, as aces in real life.

Thank God, for many of us flying Fw or P47/51, there is still surprise and team tactics. Good wingmen will keep you clear from aces.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif BTW, in this game, in a 1 vs 1 configuration, i would chose turn rate for the same reasons Dkoor exposed. In the game, rolling is useless for me...

Blutarski2004
05-04-2007, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by JG14_Josf:
If you read the link it may become clear that in Boyd's era the roll axis was no longer a problem for some reason (perhaps the airplanes were no longer made very light with huge wings designed for slow speed handling?).

..... I don't think I claimed that roll rate was the only means of producing a fast transition. But in WW2 it was one of them.



As early as the Korean War when F-86s were energy fighting against the Mig-15 the relative roll rates were, possibly, a non-factor where roll rates at those higher speeds were on par with each other.

..... Roll reversals were a common Korean War technique used by defending Sabre pilots to gain separation from Migs.



We went through all this before and it need not be regurgitated in this thread.

..... I'm thrilled to hear you say that.


In any case, I did qualify my remark ("IIRC" = if I recall correctly ), so it MAY have been Shaw I was thinking of instead of Boyd.

stalkervision
05-04-2007, 08:39 AM
One of the main problems the hurricane had again't the 109 was it's poor roll rate. It's turning rate at certain speeds was superior to the 109. German pilots mention agan and again that their 109's roll rate far surpassed the hurricane and was a distinct advantage in air combat for them agains't the hurricane.

carguy_
05-04-2007, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
One of the main problems the hurricane had again't the 109 was it's poor roll rate. It's turning rate at certain speeds was superior to the 109. German pilots mention agan and again that their 109's roll rate far surpassed the hurricane and was a distinct advantage in air combat for them agains't the hurricane.

Ok,what next?

I see that some folks here bring up real pilot accounts on how things went and how pilots used roll rate.But I don`t see any connection to the thread question.
He`s asking us and if most of us,like say 70% aren`t real pilots then we can only comment based on game experiences.In real life yes,it maybe really worked wonderfully but in IL2 IMO it stinks.

Now what I`m saying is that I`d like any of you stating that better roll rate "beats" better turn rate to show me because I don`t believe.I fly online wars on full real+speedbar and I never can do it effectively vs Spits.Surely we can say that a very slow rolling plane falls behind the FW190 but it is extreme case.Enemies players face in my world are Spits,P40,P47,La5,Yaks.Those are good rolling planes.Surely if you fly on a df server that often I`m sure you can come up with a trk where you lost a Spit behind you while flying a FW190.And I`m saying a SpitXIc vs FW190A8.

Anyone can just do a half roll and dive away.
We`re talking here about a defensive 1v1 situation.


Oh and I ofcourse agree about the ace part.The thing about only aces being able to lose the Spit let alone turn the situation around I think would be true.


My taunt thesis here: you can`t lose a good Spit pilot in a 1v1 situation while flying FW190 using roll rate.

WWSpinDry
05-04-2007, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
[the hurricane]'s turning rate at certain speeds was superior to the 109.
I believe you may be confusing turn radius and turn rate. The radius is obvious: the size of the circle you can make in the sky. For every aircraft ever made, the same speed plus the same number of Gs equals the same turn radius. Turn rate is the speed at which the aircraft travels along the circumference of its turn circle. If you can burn around 270 degrees of your turn circle while your opponent is traversing 180, you have a significant advantage at the same turn radius--arguably if your opponent has a smaller turn radius but you have a huge rate advantage you can burn around your larger circle so fast you can get guns on a tighter-turning aircraft. That's why "rate kills."

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 09:42 AM
In any case, I did qualify my remark ("IIRC" = if I recall correctly ), so it MAY have been Shaw I was thinking of instead of Boyd.

Anything new to read concerning Boyd could help. In the link provided the use of the term Fast Transient was referring to the natural hook. I think, and you may correct me if what I am about to say is wrong, that the meaning of Fast Transients, according to Boyd, meant an ability to bleed energy faster and thereby decrease the turn radius faster and increase the turn rate faster because the plane can BLEED energy faster, so, and here is the part where you MAY feel as if you are being attacked by me, your reference to Boyd suggested something concerning roll rate, so, if there is something written by Boyd suggesting that Fast Transients means something other than FAST energy BLEED (natural hook), then, such a quote could help avoid the tit for tat argumentation.

Note: A fast transient during acceleration would not be a natural hook' nor would a fast transient during a roll. A natural hook, if I have Boyd understood, is a decreasing radius turn accomplished during a maximum performance DECELERATING turn from high speed to a stall (or to corner velocity in a dive) in the reference provided where Boyd writes:


In other words, suggests a fighter that can be used to initiate and control engagement opportunities yet has a fast transient ("natural hook") that can be used to either force an overshoot by an attacker or stay inside a hard turning defender.

As to the F-86 versus Mig-15 roll advantage (we went down this road already) there could be a link provided to back up statements intending to prove one thing or another thing or not.

Like this (http://www.acepilots.com/korea_mahurin.html)

Here too (http://www.acepilots.com/planes/f86_sabre.html)


It's a matter of training and practice. What if he turns into you and gets too close, and you can't make that turn? You gotta know what to do. You gotta know that the nose goes up, and let him come down, and then when you come around you'll still be behind him. If you try to stay on his plane, you're gonna stall your aircraft. Pretty soon you're in trouble because he's gonna reverse his turn, and you're gonna be on the outside going away from him, and you're going to have him behind you. That's what we tried to teach. We tried to make sure that our people didn't unnecessarily expose themselves to a disadvantageous position in combat.

That is all I CAN FIND on relative roll rate. Any help in finding information confirming relative roll rate is appreciated.


But I still had two MiGs behind me. Two had gone home, but I still had two behind me. We went a couple more turns, I got down to 7,000 feet, gobbling fuel like mad, keeping the MiGs to the outside. They were not turning quite as tight as I was. I rolled over the top, went around, and got behind them. They took off, and the minute they did I was so glad. I didn't have enough fuel to chase them. I was just trying to get away from them. They went back across the Yalu River, and I went off the other direction to go home.

I'm not saying that the F-86 did not have a faster roll rate (or roll acceleration) than the Mig-15. I'm asking if that fact can be confirmed as a fact. Sometimes a fact turns out to be false and sometimes the false fact turns into a myth like, for example, the F-86 out turning a Mig-15 at any speed myth.

Roll rate is roll rate. Acceleration (going from no roll to maximum roll rate) on the roll axis is another factor determining maneuverability.

Example: One plane may have a slower rate of acceleration on the roll axis and actually have a higher roll rate at a particular speed (such as a slow speed) compared to the same plane comparison at a higher speed, where, control forces, compressibility, etc. may change the dynamic comparison whereby rolls change and even reverse. One plane may reverse from having roll rate inferiority to having substantial roll rate superiority and increase the rate of acceleration on the roll axis thereby increasing the overall maneuverability as speed increases. Compare, for example, the relative roll performance between the very light Fokker Tri Plane, at slow speed, against the F-16 or the Spitfire IX and the P-47. Compare, perhaps, the Fokker Tri Plane and the Spitfire IX and the F-16 versus the P-47. Performance is relative to many factors not the least of which is true air speed during any particular moment in a comparative analysis of relative performance.

A high speed dynamic (rapid acceleration and deceleration) comparison of relative performance is quite different from a sustained level flight (stall fight) comparison of relative performance. The Fokker Tri Plane wins the stall fight no? None of the other planes can roll as good as the Fokker in a maximum performance level sustained turn fight. The Fokker Tri Plane can't roll at all at Mach 1.

stalkervision
05-04-2007, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
[the hurricane]'s turning rate at certain speeds was superior to the 109.
I believe you may be confusing turn radius and turn rate. The radius is obvious: the size of the circle you can make in the sky. For every aircraft ever made, the same speed plus the same number of Gs equals the same turn radius. Turn rate is the speed at which the aircraft travels along the circumference of its turn circle. If you can burn around 270 degrees of your turn circle while your opponent is traversing 180, you have a significant advantage at the same turn radius--arguably if your opponent has a smaller turn radius but you have a huge rate advantage you can burn around your larger circle so fast you can get guns on a tighter-turning aircraft. That's why "rate kills." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You may be right.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I'm not totally sure about the Hurricane rate/radius.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 10:02 AM
My taunt thesis here: you can`t lose a good Spit pilot in a 1v1 situation while flying FW190 using roll rate.

To Whom It May Concern:

To view the game experience accurately compared to the real life facts requires an accurate accounting of what actually happens in both.

Things to consider:

1. How fast does each plane accelerate from no roll to the roll rate maximum and then how fast does the plane roll from level flight to a flat level turn one way, how fast (how much actual time lapsed) can each plane reverse from one direction turning to another direction turning (roll performance)?
2. How fast can each plane accelerate from no lift production (g production) to maximum instantaneous lift production (g production) after (or during) the initial turn from level flight to any attitude of turn (left, right, up, down)?
3. How fast can each plane go from level flight to 6 g in one direction and then the time continues to lapse into a 6 g turn in the opposite direction = how much time goes by when both planes start out in level unaccelerated flight to a maximum performance left turn, then reversing, to a maximum performance right turn?
4. Which plane can perform the maximum performance reversal from level flight to 6 g in one direction to 6 g in the opposite direction faster?

If the above is not known in the game and not known in reality, then, the above is not known in the game and not known in reality for any particular plane match-up.

Note: The plane that rolls faster and burns energy faster will complete the maneuver faster so long as the maneuver is started at a sufficient speed to avoid stalling before the maneuver is completed. In other words the faster plane performing the maneuver will be the one that burns energy faster.

In the case of which plane can perform the maneuver faster between the Spitfire IX and the P-47 in reality, well, three people (Robert Shaw, Robert S. Johnson and one Spitfire pilot) appear to know the facts under specific test conditions.

In the case of the game, well, most of us know what really happens in the game.

Xiolablu3
05-04-2007, 11:44 AM
A SPitfire or Zero would be stupid to try and avoid by using roll, because usually the opposition plane can roll faster than them. Certainly the Zero is a very poor roller, and the Spitfire is only average.

Xiolablu3
05-04-2007, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by carguy_:


Anyone can just do a half roll and dive away.
We`re talking here about a defensive 1v1 situation.



I am confused at why you think these two sentences are not linked.

WHy is a half roll and diving away not a valid manouvre in a defensive 1 vs 1 situation?

Xiolablu3
05-04-2007, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by JG14_Josf:


In the case of which plane can perform the maneuver faster between the Spitfire IX and the P-47 in reality, well, three people (Robert Shaw, Robert S. Johnson and one Spitfire pilot) appear to know the facts under specific test conditions.

In the case of the game, well, most of us know what really happens in the game.


Again, another total load of misinformation.

WHat Spitfire pilot? Novice or Ace?

What controlled tests?

What Spitfire version?

Where are the results?


The 2 pilots were playing the sky, SHaw has absolutely no idea what Spitfire, who the pilot was, the tests were certainly not controlled.

Why do you repeat all this rubbish again?

tigertalon
05-04-2007, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Roll is just piss poor maneuver compared to turn either offensive or defensive.

Hmm, ever got bounced by a diving 109 while flying P38 at high speed? J/L makes a HUGE difference here.

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 12:27 PM
Why do you repeat all this rubbish again?

To whom it may concern:

The "rubbish" is published in two books.

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/513P2687GSL._BO2,204,203,200_PIlitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg

That is one. If you want to define "rubbish" better, then, get the book and read it carefully otherwise you may not learn anything.

Moderators note:

I am trying to avoid taking offense here so please remember how this got started again if someone starts sending you personal messages.

As to why I repeat referring to Robert Shaw's example of one of the best examples of the use of energy tactics in his book, well, the subject is roll performance versus turn performance and, in fact, Robert S. Johnson had this to say about that subject:


I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

That sums it up for me, while, your mileage may vary. Go figure!

Look...I've been personally invited in this thread otherwise I probably would not have been inspired to contribute. I usually restrict my participation to Energy topics and sometimes matters of historical accuracy.

If you don't like what I write, then, ignore it? If you don't like what Shaw or Johnson wrote, then, take that up with someone who knows them. I cannot speak for them so their words will have to do all their talking for them.


I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

Again that sums this topic up for me. You can argue about it if you want.

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
Well for me the answer is very simple.Turn rate for sure.IMO to use the roll rate effectively you must have experience and far greater flying skills.


In 1916 Max Immelman showed how to turn a plane faster using the vertical than it could hope
to turn flat +and+ conserve most of his energy by the end of the process. That is what energy
fighting has over stall fighting (hard turning with or without flaps) is conserving energy.
But it can be learned one trick at a time, like using half loops twisted so you exit in the
right direction. And doing that fastest takes having the best roll at whatever speed you do
the twist so I voted ROLL.

It don't take special skills but it does take practice and a light touch. Fine control is
impossible I have found with weight of arm resting on the stick which is what most of us do
when the action gets heavy. That takes practice and conscious effort to defeat but it is
worth it. It takes fine control to conserve the most energy possible.

ploughman
05-04-2007, 01:21 PM
Was it Immelman? I thought those energy retaining turns were Doolittle turns, from interwar air-racing.

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
[the hurricane]'s turning rate at certain speeds was superior to the 109.
I believe you may be confusing turn radius and turn rate. The radius is obvious: the size of the circle you can make in the sky. For every aircraft ever made, the same speed plus the same number of Gs equals the same turn radius. Turn rate is the speed at which the aircraft travels along the circumference of its turn circle. If you can burn around 270 degrees of your turn circle while your opponent is traversing 180, you have a significant advantage at the same turn radius--arguably if your opponent has a smaller turn radius but you have a huge rate advantage you can burn around your larger circle so fast you can get guns on a tighter-turning aircraft. That's why "rate kills." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You may be right.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I'm not totally sure about the Hurricane rate/radius.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hurricane turn rate varied greatly with altitude. From BoB accounts I've read that at about
8,000 ft they were about equal but above 12,000 ft the Hurri was toast and below 4,000 the
109 should exit and lose the Hurri with greater speed --- of course this is BEFORE the Hurri
is meters away from a firing solution if the tracers aren't going by the 109 already.

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Ploughman:
Was it Immelman? I thought those energy retaining turns were Doolittle turns, from interwar air-racing.

In 1916 Max Immelman developed what is argued was really a wingover, you swoop up and curve over at good maneuver speed either coming back down in the direction you want to go or staying
up there in the direction you want to go. You rise to convert your excess for turn speed then
turn with gravity aiding to achieve an even tighter corner then drop to get your speed back.

He did that in Eindekkers! The flat turn in one of those would have taken forever and bled
all his excess speed. He could go like 90mph! Stall around half that. You don't pull turns
on the edge with that plane because one finger away is a near total stall, not 40% of the wing
as warning but all at once stall. So it doesn't require that much to pull off in a WWII
plane does it? Well, if you don't oversontrol?

ploughman
05-04-2007, 01:58 PM
I had a look at the Immelman, basically a Doolittle turn is a modified Immelman and emphasises energy management in the same way the Immelman does. My bad.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by JG14_Josf:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

Again that sums this topic up for me. You can argue about it if you want. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

quite u should post the quote from johnson where he states he could outroll any 190 :P.

from p47 tactical trials.


The good aileron control gives the P-47 an excellent rate of roll even at high speeds, and during mock combats it was considered to roll as well as, if not better than the Spitfire at about 30,000 feet. At lower altitudes there is nothing to choose between them

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by Ploughman:
I had a look at the Immelman, basically a Doolittle turn is a modified Immelman and emphasises energy management in the same way the Immelman does. My bad.

I was hooked on WWI airwar since about 1966 when I built a kit model SPAD and then started
reading. I went through all the library books by 72. But there's always things to learn.
The thing is that the moves are pretty simple or you couldn't have done them in those early
planes. And I find that what those planes could do in tactics describes a major subset of
later tactics at least up before the jets with the more thrust with speed angle to exploit.

I'm looking forward to KoTS.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Yes, yes it's about roll. You convinced me. That is why you should avoid mixing it up in your Tempest Vs nasty FW-190's on deck. Don't do it - they'll outscissor you!
Also pass that information to the Spitfire flyers too, please convince them too!

I wouldnt avoid mixing it up with a tempest and i wouldnt the other way around ither. Ive beaten tempests who were close on my six with rolling maneuvers forcing overshoot etc, as in the tempest because of it i also know how to not get sucked in.

Just as turn will not save everytime vs a good pilot nether will roll maneuvers, and since i like deflection shooting i perfer them to turn with out any roll evasives.


But you can't show ONE where your target Spitfire or Zero is deliberately evading by roll? Pffffttt... You are flying Vs n00bs I tell you Wink

i do not understand what you are requesting? a spitfire/zero evading in roll from a superior rolling aircraft? seems a bit of a silly request. Not saying it cant be done but this is about roll advantage.


I tend to agree. If he didn't turn, if he rolled, he would have survived. Moron!

yes he would have survived, i had only one chance at a shot and his predictable flight path meant i hit him with a fatal burst. If he had barrel rolled i would not have got a guns solution and would have been dead meat after that.


Yes must be that, and they are turning too! Morons don't know that is piss poor evasive tactic!

good thing to, i like easy kills.


Then roll your ******* 47 vs Zero!!! That must work I tell you! Zero can't roll for **** Wink You can do it, you can outroll him!

again i fail to understand what you are trying to say or even the relevance it has to the text u quote.

DKoor
05-04-2007, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
i do not understand what you are requesting?

again i fail to understand what you are trying to say or even the relevance it has to the text u quote. Too bad. But don't blame me for trying to get you to understand.

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 03:14 PM
Online, where a ping of 500 is acceptable you always see the other guy move just that much
later than he did on his machine which tracks where he really is in the VW when it comes down
to it, maneuver or getting hit by fire.

The best remedy I have known is not to follow too close. Intersect his path is better.
Hardest part is the shooting but history puts that in perspective, Aces were the few.

DKoor
05-04-2007, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by tigertalon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Roll is just piss poor maneuver compared to turn either offensive or defensive.

Hmm, ever got bounced by a diving 109 while flying P38 at high speed? J/L makes a HUGE difference here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No - I don't fly a 38. In fact I flew it exactly two times online as far as I can remember.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Too bad. But don't blame me for trying to get you to understand.

understand what?

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 03:26 PM
quite u should post the quote from johnson where he states he could outroll any 190 :P.

To whom it may concern:

Why involve me in your need to quote something? If you feel the need to quote something, then, you feel the need to quote something; how does that need of yours have anything to do with me?

Two particularly successful fighter pilots had something to say about the topic. I quoted one of them. If you feel the need to do something then why don't you do what you feel the need to do and why not leave me out of it?

My point (which may not concern anyone) had to do with the relative importance of having an advantage in roll performance compared to an advantage in turn rate performance. What is the topic?

OK...I rechecked the topic. The topic isn't about what I should or should not do according to anyone who feels that I should or should not do - anything whatsoever.

Example: u should...post something having nothing to do with the topic.

I don't feel the need.

My point had to do with how roll performance and turn rate performance relate or inter-relate. One appears to relate to the other in the following manner:


I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

That appears to be self-explanatory. The context from which that self-explanatory explanation originates may help anyone understand the self-explanatory explanation in case the explanation is not self-explanatory for you (if you have a concern for this topic).

If not then not I'm not your keeper.

DKoor
05-04-2007, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Too bad. But don't blame me for trying to get you to understand.

understand what? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You still don't get it?

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by JG14_Josf:
Example: u should...post something having nothing to do with the topic.


I don't feel the need.


u have just posted something that has nothing to do with the topic. It seems u had the need.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
You still don't get it?

what is to get.

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 03:40 PM
u have just posted something that has nothing to do with the topic. It seems u had the need.

To whom it may concern,

In a flame fest forum there continues to be a need to identify the person or persons responsible for starting flame fests. A need exists to point out the flame starters as they start. That need is created by the person starting the flame fest.

I'm not saying that anyone has started a flame fest yet. I'm trying to find out why my post was quoted and then someone used my post to launch into something that had nothing to do with my post or the topic as far as I knew and as far as I know now based upon the last response by the person quoting my post.

What next?

How about a few words on the relationship between turn rate and roll rate?

Well...I think both measures of performance are relatively unimportant on their own. Roll rate, for example, is practically meaningless without a measure for acceleration on the roll axis. I think one of my posts have already tried to illuminate this fact.

Robert S. Johnson's quote sums things up well enough no?

Allow me to close my off-topic rants with a relevant quote:


I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

HellToupee
05-04-2007, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by JG14_Josf:
Well...I think both measures of performance are relatively unimportant on their own. Roll rate, for example, is practically meaningless without a measure for acceleration on the roll axis. I think one of my posts have already tried to illuminate this fact.

Robert S. Johnson's quote sums things up well enough no?

Allow me to close my off-topic rants with a relevant quote:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But a pilots quote is pretty meaningless without understanding the conditions or even type/pilot that was chasing.


The good aileron control gives the P-47 an excellent rate of roll even at high speeds, and during mock combats it was considered to roll as well as, if not better than the Spitfire at about 30,000 feet. At lower altitudes there is nothing to choose between them

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/RollChartClr2.jpg

What this would indicate in rolling manovers the plane that holds the initiative in the roll aka the one being chased also has an aditional advantage of reaction time. Even in game this also is highly important as also preempting a roll can cancel out its advantage.

And also, harden up a bit or ill go tell mommy ur picking on me.

DKoor
05-04-2007, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
You still don't get it?

what is to get. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't have more time to explain (because sure as hell this already took too much).

But as one online buddy to another I'll give you a test if you really want to get it.

Go online and make a ten fights 1v1 you in 190 and your oppo in Spitfire. Try to defeat him by outrolling him.
As you claimed in your previous post, you have better roll than him, so there shouldn't be much problems.

Then another ten fights 1v1 you in Spitfire and oppo in 190. Try to defeat him by outturning him and evading his deadly roll.

You don't have to use that setup if you don't want. FM-2 vs A6M5, or whatever you please - just make sure you have good turner vs good roller. When they mix it up you should be able to spot the decisive advantage.

See where that gets you, and we may continue to communicate.

JG14_Josf
05-04-2007, 04:05 PM
But a pilots quote is pretty meaningless without understanding the conditions or even type/pilot that was chasing.

HellToupee,

Are you intending to discuss something specific? The quote I quoted is specific. The quote I quoted isn't just a random pilot's quote' as your quote above appears to suggest by innuendo if not specifically stated. I can't tell.

The specific quote is specific. If any plane can out roll another plane two to one, then, the following is true (according to someone who has earned the title authority' on the topic):


And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

If that doesn't manage to address your concern for me and my contributions on this topic, then, we can try harder to penetrate the general lack of ability to communicate accurately (whatever the cause may be for that obvious inability).

carguy_
05-04-2007, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am confused at why you think these two sentences are not linked.

WHy is a half roll and diving away not a valid manouvre in a defensive 1 vs 1 situation?

I mean that in a typical online war scenario this kind of a defensive maneuver puts your mission to an end.To uotpace and lose a Spitfire,you need to see him sooner because he`ll run you down if not or you`ll just plain cook your engine.But when a Spit pilot does not have the urge to lose like 2500m instantly following you and disengages you still don`t have any more choice than just rtbing.Because to come back to an offensive stance you`ll need almost 10 next minutes of orbiting outside the target area.That`s more than enough to make yourself useless for any kind of positive contribution to mission outcome.
You see,we can`t just roll and dive away leaving everything behind as there are others in need of help.

I can dive away from a Spit in a 109 too but I have other choices - try to turn it around or even get into a stall fight.
As I said - if this roll advantage is so wonderfull I want to see the pilot use it effectively with a result of gaining angles on the Spitfire or dumping him behind(making him lose you from sight completely) while still staying in action over target area.

Any fast plane can do a roll and dive away to run.But it does not give the FW190 any possibility to hold against a spitfire on his own.


It is not a DF server where I take another 20mins after dive to position myself again for another attack.
I NEED to be there when I`m needed and not just be forced to run like hell everytime I see Spit on my six because to the mission my participation becomes worthless.


Simple comparement.
Defensive situation.

109:
options - dive,turn,climb;

If dive - return to combat after 3min of climbing.Plane still taking part in action.

190

options - dive and run;

If dive - rtb or get killed.

In real life 1v1 situations couldn`t occure so often as here online.And they do, a lot of times.
How can you possibly value roll if it does not give you any big benefits against Spit?

Henkie327
05-04-2007, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
Now what I`m saying is that I`d like any of you stating that better roll rate "beats" better turn rate to show me because I don`t believe.I fly online wars on full real+speedbar and I never can do it effectively vs Spits.Surely we can say that a very slow rolling plane falls behind the FW190 but it is extreme case.Enemies players face in my world are Spits,P40,P47,La5,Yaks.Those are good rolling planes.Surely if you fly on a df server that often I`m sure you can come up with a trk where you lost a Spit behind you while flying a FW190.And I`m saying a SpitXIc vs FW190A8.

Anyone can just do a half roll and dive away.
We`re talking here about a defensive 1v1 situation.


Oh and I ofcourse agree about the ace part.The thing about only aces being able to lose the Spit let alone turn the situation around I think would be true.


My taunt thesis here: you can`t lose a good Spit pilot in a 1v1 situation while flying FW190 using roll rate.

It does not have to be about a 190 losing a spitpilot in a 1v1 situation.

The situation could be a 190 pilot diving down more or less vertically on a flatturning spitpilot flying more or less directly below the diving 190 pilot.

No matter how fast the spitpilot can turn around his flat turncircle, the 190 pilot diving down from above will not only be able to change directions faster than the spit can rate around his circle, but he will also be able to turn inside the turncircle of the spit. In this particular situation, roll rate beats turn rate everytime. It's really not difficult to picture.

Basically any BnZ-er, when making an attack dive from above adjusts his attack by rolling.

Viper2005_
05-04-2007, 06:06 PM
Roll keeps you alive whilst you get some knots on the clock and regain your composure.

If Spitfires are following you then they're not covering targets.

The fact is that in a world of limited SA, speed is life. If I'm in a 190A and I meet the best +18 Spitfire pilot in the world then I'm safe as houses unless either he has lots of e on me or I'm stupid enough to stick around.

As I pointed out in my first post on this thread, speed & roll rate tend to go together.

If I had to go to war and risk my real life, I'd rather have the B&Z fighter than the T&B fighter because despite the fact that I'm not that good at BFM, I can live to run another day!

If your ground attack guys need close cover over the target you're in trouble anyway.

If you want to live, use Return of the Jedi rules. In other words, ensure that when you drop ordnance that you're already on your way out! Never turn over the target, whether it's to make a second pass or to get home.

With sensible geometry you can dive in to target right on Vd (800 km/h+ in the 190A in game) and be 2 grids clear before you slow to your level deck speed. Which is still fast enough to leave Spitfires in the dust. Event the mighty Tempest can't close the gap; if you've got 500 m or so to play with then you're fairly safe unless he's got a long convergence and is a good shot because he'll overheat first.

The Mustang III is an absolute terror, but so few pilots use it to full advantage that the risk is almost akin to being struck by lightning.

Anyway, with inventive routes & accurate dive bombing the 190A is amongst the best piston engined strike fighters out there for attacking defended targets, even if you're stuck with the (horrible!) A8.

M_Gunz
05-04-2007, 10:43 PM
Prop is less than gravity, gravity is 1 but lift can be very high with speed, 6+ G's.
So all the fast turns start with repositioning that lift quickest. I can come out of
a half loop facing any which way is less time than a 180 deg flat turn, about half
with gravity assist cutting the height and time of a vertical 180 compared to flat.
Even in a relative turn fighter isn't it best to fly the tilted egg-shape only tighter?
Or maybe the worst thing about being a turn fighter is not knowing any better.

HellToupee
05-05-2007, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
You still don't get it?

what is to get. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't have more time to explain (because sure as hell this already took too much).

But as one online buddy to another I'll give you a test if you really want to get it.

Go online and make a ten fights 1v1 you in 190 and your oppo in Spitfire. Try to defeat him by outrolling him.
As you claimed in your previous post, you have better roll than him, so there shouldn't be much problems.

Then another ten fights 1v1 you in Spitfire and oppo in 190. Try to defeat him by outturning him and evading his deadly roll.

You don't have to use that setup if you don't want. FM-2 vs A6M5, or whatever you please - just make sure you have good turner vs good roller. When they mix it up you should be able to spot the decisive advantage.

See where that gets you, and we may continue to communicate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What does 1v1 fights have to do with anything?

Sounds like u want to put the roller in a stall fight pretty ******ed IMO.

Especially in bnz roll is important if the bandit you are diving on evades u need to roll into the turn as quick as possible or u will not get a shot. Try diving on a 190 with a full wing spit while going 600kmh, and getting him to just slight turn with roll likely ull never even get a chance to shoot and he loses little energy.



You don't have to use that setup if you don't want. FM-2 vs A6M5, or whatever you please - just make sure you have good turner vs good roller. When they mix it up you should be able to spot the decisive advantage.

Point of high roll in defense is allowing u to evade with little energy loss and avoid mixing it up. If one does make a mistake and get into a low speed low level stall fight like u seem to suggest then roll is still very good at keeping u alive with sissors etc.

As u can see by the poll over 60% of ppl understand the value of roll.

Nimits
05-05-2007, 12:40 AM
There can be lots of posts and discussions and charts and arguments, but as someone who has been there-done that I can tell you that between the two only the turn rate matters.

Really . . . because Boyd, and if I rember correctly, Robert Shaw as well, put more emphasis on roll rate over sustained turn. Not doubting, just curious . . .

Manu-6S
05-05-2007, 04:15 AM
Originally posted by carguy_:
IMO a best plane is a plane that is a jack of all trades.The IL2 version of FW190 would have a huge advantage in roll IF it could pull a high angle fast turn,at high speed ofcourse.In IL2 you can`t do that because the plane shudders.If only FW190 had elevators of P51...

BUMP!!!

karost
05-05-2007, 04:36 AM
for me I take Roll rate,

in FW190A9
if I have spit on my six 300 meters on the deck
with my speed about 520 km/h this is no problem
I can drag him to my friends.

but if I have a faster plane on my six about 3K.
he can not stay with me when I dance with hi-speed roll http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Manu-6S
05-05-2007, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Henkie327:
No matter how fast the spitpilot can turn around his flat turncircle, the 190 pilot diving down from above will not only be able to change directions faster than the spit can rate around his circle, but he will also be able to turn inside the turncircle of the spit. In this particular situation, roll rate beats turn rate everytime. It's really not difficult to picture.


Look at the carguy's post I quoted.

Roll rate can be usefull to take you out of spit's sight BUT you cant use it to "change" direction: FW190s don't lose energy only by shallow manouvres (both horizontal and vertical), so you MUST do light movements using elevators or you will find yourself losing your roll rate adv on the Spit who can instead do "hard" manouvre with the stick without losing energy...

If you have to dive, go straight and a least do really small movements on vertical axis. Split-S
doesn't seem work IF the Spit still want to chase you.

DKoor
05-05-2007, 06:22 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
You still don't get it?

what is to get. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't have more time to explain (because sure as hell this already took too much).

But as one online buddy to another I'll give you a test if you really want to get it.

Go online and make a ten fights 1v1 you in 190 and your oppo in Spitfire. Try to defeat him by outrolling him.
As you claimed in your previous post, you have better roll than him, so there shouldn't be much problems.

Then another ten fights 1v1 you in Spitfire and oppo in 190. Try to defeat him by outturning him and evading his deadly roll.

You don't have to use that setup if you don't want. FM-2 vs A6M5, or whatever you please - just make sure you have good turner vs good roller. When they mix it up you should be able to spot the decisive advantage.

See where that gets you, and we may continue to communicate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What does 1v1 fights have to do with anything?

Sounds like u want to put the roller in a stall fight pretty ******ed IMO.

Especially in bnz roll is important if the bandit you are diving on evades u need to roll into the turn as quick as possible or u will not get a shot. Try diving on a 190 with a full wing spit while going 600kmh, and getting him to just slight turn with roll likely ull never even get a chance to shoot and he loses little energy.



You don't have to use that setup if you don't want. FM-2 vs A6M5, or whatever you please - just make sure you have good turner vs good roller. When they mix it up you should be able to spot the decisive advantage.

Point of high roll in defense is allowing u to evade with little energy loss and avoid mixing it up. If one does make a mistake and get into a low speed low level stall fight like u seem to suggest then roll is still very good at keeping u alive with sissors etc.

As u can see by the poll over 60% of ppl understand the value of roll. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>See this;

Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
Since it's a truism in the real Air Force that "Rate kills," I'll vote for turn rate over roll rate, even though both are important.

Originally posted by WWSensei:
As Spinny said. The axiom is "Rate kills". Roll is important because it lets you initiate turns faster.

There can be lots of posts and discussions and charts and arguments, but as someone who has been there-done that I can tell you that between the two only the turn rate matters.

Look who's saying that "Rate kills" - that isn't DKoor, SpinDry, Sensei or some other member of this forum.... those are words of those who actually know what they are talking about.
I'm sorry to say this, but if you can't understand this very well written and understandable words then you my mate - are limited in understanding aero combat.
Possibility that 60% of forum members here are limited in this regard doesn't surprise me. At all.

JG14_Josf
05-05-2007, 08:05 AM
Really . . . because Boyd, and if I rember correctly, Robert Shaw as well, put more emphasis on roll rate over sustained turn. Not doubting, just curious . . .

If the above is true, then, evidence supporting the truth could support it. Where is that evidence?

Roll rate is a very limited measure of performance. One plane can conceivably have a higher roll rate and a slower rate of roll acceleration. Shaw pointing this out in his book Fighter Combat and Boyd, as far as I can find so far, doesn't stress or appraise roll rate or sustained turn performance in an significant way above the other either.

An advantage in roll performance (the ability to accelerate from one attitude on the roll axis to another attitude on the roll axis) can eliminate an advantage in turn performance (the ability to accelerate on the pitch axis from one direction to another direction).

Therefore; an advantage in the roll axis can beat an advantage in the pitch axis (not just roll rate and not just sustained' turn performance) defensively.

If you read Boyd's Fast Transients document (linked earlier), then, you can also see how roll (alone) cannot be used offensively, or, pitch performance can beat roll performance.

Roll axis performance (not just roll rate) alone can defeat pitch axis advantages - the example is provided by Robert Shaw and Robert S. Johnson in "Fighter Combat".

As such:


I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me.

A pitch performance advantage can defeat both a roll advantage and a pitch performance disadvantage (defensive) in the form of an overshoot (a tighter natural hook).

A pitch performance advantage can also be used offensively, of course, and this advantage is hardly limited to the very limited measure known as sustained' turn performance.

The plane that can accelerate on the pitch axis faster is very much better than the plane that cannot accelerate on the pitch axis as fast and the faster plane accelerating on the pitch axis may not be the plane with the better sustained' turn rate no more than the plane with the higher roll rate is always the plane having the faster acceleration on the roll axis.

This is also similar to the misunderstanding concerning climb rate, where, the plane with the higher climb rate is not necessarily the plane that can accelerate faster in level flight, diving flight, or decelerate slower in vertical flight straight up.

So...roll rate is a performance measure that doesn't measure enough of what is going on to quantify an advantage on the roll axis let alone quantify an advantage over turn rate. On the other hand the term turn rate' if that measure excludes all the variables in pitch performance except the sustained' level' turn rate, then, and again, that measure doesn't even begin to quantify pitch performance let alone begin to quantify the betterness' of Turn Rate over Roll rate.

Even so; the advantage of a performance edge on the roll axis alone is very limited offensively while an advantage of a pitch axis performance is all but necessary offensively if the opponent is aware of the attack. The idea that any plane can shoot down another plane while the other plane is flying defensively assumes that the shooter holds at least one advantage even if the only advantage resides in the pilot.

HellToupee
05-05-2007, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Look who's saying that "Rate kills" - that isn't DKoor, SpinDry, Sensei or some other member of this forum.... those are words of those who actually know what they are talking about.
I'm sorry to say this, but if you can't understand this very well written and understandable words then you my mate - are limited in understanding aero combat.
Possibility that 60% of forum members here are limited in this regard doesn't surprise me. At all.

I think you are confusing modern missle based aircombat with guns based ww2 combat, ull notice modern fighters.

Also you forget we also talk of ingame il2 here, u know the one we all play, if you cant understand the importance of roll ingame or how to utilise it how can u even realise its potential in real life combat?

DKoor
05-05-2007, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
What does 1v1 fights have to do with anything? Besides determining what the strengths of those aircraft are - nothing.

Sounds like u want to put the roller in a stall fight pretty ******ed IMO. If the roll is more important you should excel over turnfighter in most of those fights, high speed - low speed! Roll is more important combat maneuver, remember?

Especially in bnz roll is important if the bandit you are diving on evades u need to roll into the turn as quick as possible or u will not get a shot. No! You can park on his 6 and blast him outta sky, and he can only cry a river about it. Errrr.... wait, he can roll better! I forgot that!

Try diving on a 190 with a full wing spit while going 600kmh, and getting him to just slight turn with roll likely ull never even get a chance to shoot and he loses little energy. I bet you're laughing on this one too - besides just everyone else. Spit will dive on 190 and 190 pilot, seeing that Spitfire is actually ABOVE him, will die from heart attack.
You may think that online Spitfire pilots are idiots but they are not THAT much of an idiots. Rarely anyone is.

Point of high roll in defense is allowing u to evade with little energy loss and avoid mixing it up. Is this what you are going to tell your fellow pilots?
Someone from the crowd will yell "but sir, why can't we evade with excellent turn with little energy loss and then mix it up like every Spitfire can"? After which you'll look: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

If one does make a mistake and get into a low speed low level stall fight like u seem to suggest then roll is still very good at keeping u alive with sissors etc. Since you have so much faith in this let's see where that will get you when you need to mix it up! But hey you have 2x better roll, you must win!

Originally posted by HellToupee:
Also you forget we also talk of ingame il2 here, Look above, it's you who suggest that FW-190 can evade a Spitfire by outrolling him!

u know the one we all play, if you cant understand the importance of roll ingame or how to utilise it how can u even realise its potential in real life combat? Not only me, just about anyone having brain realize it, sure.

But if it isn't for excellent turn of FW-190, P-51 or other fighters on high speed we could all just cry a river with excellent roll.

Jaws2002
05-05-2007, 12:33 PM
In this game just like in real world this days of fast jets you can't see the advantage of good roll rate.

why i say that. This days fighters have boosted ailerons and they can all pull scarry roll rates.
In an environment when you need a fraction of a second to roll 90 degree and initiate a turn in most fighters the turn is the only thing that matter, since you still need a good number of seconds to do a full turn and you need just a second in most fighters to do a full roll.

In the game all planes roll way too good at low speed and most of them still roll too good at high speed. in WW2 fighters didn't have boosted ailerons with only one exception. P-38.

Many fighters needed few good seconds to bank 180 degrees. that's why Roll was important back then. still not as important as the turning ability but it was way more important then it is today and also more important then it is in the game.

Just look at P-39 and FW-190. Look at the difference that existed in real world and the difference in the game between this two.

That's why in game roll rate means something only at high speed where the planes are a bit closer to real life.

Henkie327
05-05-2007, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Henkie327:
No matter how fast the spitpilot can turn around his flat turncircle, the 190 pilot diving down from above will not only be able to change directions faster than the spit can rate around his circle, but he will also be able to turn inside the turncircle of the spit. In this particular situation, roll rate beats turn rate everytime. It's really not difficult to picture.


Look at the carguy's post I quoted.

Roll rate can be usefull to take you out of spit's sight BUT you cant use it to "change" direction: FW190s don't lose energy only by shallow manouvres (both horizontal and vertical), so you MUST do light movements using elevators or you will find yourself losing your roll rate adv on the Spit who can instead do "hard" manouvre with the stick without losing energy...

If you have to dive, go straight and a least do really small movements on vertical axis. Split-S
doesn't seem work IF the Spit still want to chase you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ofcourse you change directions by rolling. That is about the first thing you do when you want to change directions (rolling)

Maybe you are talking about a situation where the spitfire is close behind a 190, but I am describing the situation where the 190 pilot is high above the spitfire diving down on it.

Suppose the spitfire pilot wants to change directions and turns flat. Then the diving 190 only has to roll to change directions for a good intercept. Plus he can still turn (roll)inside the spitfires turncircle.

Brain32
05-05-2007, 06:33 PM
Suppose the spitfire pilot wants to change directions and turns flat.
Just note that here "we" are supposing one of the worst decisions a Spitfire pilot can make, we call that a "Spit-iot". However everybody knows that any half-brained Spit pilot never breaks attack with flat turn, but rather a climbing turn, I think Russians used to call that combat turn?
The point is that by doing this you are forcing a FW190 pilot to use his elevator to correct his aim, but hey that's not enough he also has to use his aileron right? How much E will he bleed and what will hapen if he miss? Can he make it? Not if the Spitty pilot timed it properly that's what I'm sure about(we're talking about the game ofcourse lol not real life). I have A LOT of expirience in doging not one but multiple bandits in the Spitfire, the only thing that is really, really screwed up is two bandits in a short interval, say 5sec.
Good roll-rate ain't worth a sh1t without atleast acceptable turn rate, or above average initial turn rate, this is why Tempest is so freakin good, good roll rate at design speed, exceptional initial turn rate and beats almost all it's opponentis in sustained too(in the game only ofcourse, not RL lol).

As for evading I will just give two examples:
#1 - FW190 rolls in front of a Spitfire - it continuosly passes in front of Spits cannons
#2 - Spitfire brakes into hard turn in front of FW190 - FW190 has one second or less to get fatal hits on the Spit, after that Spit is completely out of FW's cannons, and can either go offensive on the FW or climb out and wait for better opportunity if this one just zoomed pass and didn't even bother to attempt something else(in which case it would probably get shot down).

In conclusion if my life was on the line I would take best roller over best turner, but NOT in case in which that best roller is extremely poor(worst imagineable) turner.

HellToupee
05-06-2007, 01:09 AM
uhh brain 190s intial turn is very good, these are things speed bleed and elevator authority make effective.

IMO climbing turn is the worst possible defensive move, since it bleeds all your speed quite quickly, a slow moving plane no matter how well it can circle eg gladiator is an easy shot.


Good roll-rate ain't worth a sh1t without atleast acceptable turn rate, or above average initial turn rate, this is why Tempest is so freakin good, good roll rate at design speed, exceptional initial turn rate and beats almost all it's opponentis in sustained too(in the game only ofcourse, not RL lol).

d9 best turn time 22sec tempest 22sec :P, infact 190s intital high speed turn i would rate better.

Brain32
05-06-2007, 03:10 AM
uhh brain 190s intial turn is very good, these are things speed bleed and elevator authority make effective.
D9's is pretty good however that is not a FockeWulf http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif it actually flies like a plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

IMO climbing turn is the worst possible defensive move, since it bleeds all your speed quite quickly
Well you may want to check that out again, I've been using that extremely sucessfully since forever. Also why care about loosing speed, if the guy bounced you he will zoom up, by the time he repeats the pass you will reagin E, but at the bigger altitude, eventually if you keep calm and repeat nicely timed evasions, you may equal altitude with your attacker rather soon - I did that many times http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


d9 best turn time 22sec tempest 22sec :P, infact 190s intital high speed turn i would rate better.
Sure, only thing is that the D9 has to be at or over 400kmh and Tempest can do it at 240kmh http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. Besides I never saw a trial against a D9, however I did against the captured FW190A, the game looks rather funny in this regard, but there are other allied heavy weight champions that pwn Antons in turn without any historical base so it's not fair to point out the Tempest only http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Manu-6S
05-06-2007, 03:22 AM
Originally posted by Henkie327:
Ofcourse you change directions by rolling. That is about the first thing you do when you want to change directions (rolling)


Ehmm... You aren't changing your vector by rolling: your nose is directed always in the same direction.

As Brain said: "FW190 rolls in front of a Spitfire - it continuosly passes in front of Spits cannons".

You mean the initial turn, where roll is only one of the factors with elevator authority.

And I quote another part of Brain's post, who I totally agree.


The point is that by doing this you are forcing a FW190 pilot to use his elevator to correct his aim, but hey that's not enough he also has to use his aileron right? How much E will he bleed and what will hapen if he miss? Can he make it?

How many time I saw a Spit in front of my FW190 who made almost a loop in front of me and I couldn't aim him because the plane shudders when I pull the stick? and even trying this I just lost energy and all my option is to fly straight (and usually diving, since the Spit is now on your 6 with tons of energy).

FW190 shudders, BF109 can't even do this since the controls are ineffective at high speed (450km/h...).

Henkie327
05-06-2007, 03:31 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Suppose the spitfire pilot wants to change directions and turns flat.
Just note that here "we" are supposing one of the worst decisions a Spitfire pilot can make, we call that a "Spit-iot". However everybody knows that any half-brained Spit pilot never breaks attack with flat turn, but rather a climbing turn, I think Russians used to call that combat turn?
The point is that by doing this you are forcing a FW190 pilot to use his elevator to correct his aim, but hey that's not enough he also has to use his aileron right? How much E will he bleed and what will hapen if he miss? Can he make it? Not if the Spitty pilot timed it properly that's what I'm sure about(we're talking about the game ofcourse lol not real life). I have A LOT of expirience in doging not one but multiple bandits in the Spitfire, the only thing that is really, really screwed up is two bandits in a short interval, say 5sec.
Good roll-rate ain't worth a sh1t without atleast acceptable turn rate, or above average initial turn rate, this is why Tempest is so freakin good, good roll rate at design speed, exceptional initial turn rate and beats almost all it's opponentis in sustained too(in the game only ofcourse, not RL lol).

As for evading I will just give two examples:
#1 - FW190 rolls in front of a Spitfire - it continuosly passes in front of Spits cannons
#2 - Spitfire brakes into hard turn in front of FW190 - FW190 has one second or less to get fatal hits on the Spit, after that Spit is completely out of FW's cannons, and can either go offensive on the FW or climb out and wait for better opportunity if this one just zoomed pass and didn't even bother to attempt something else(in which case it would probably get shot down).

In conclusion if my life was on the line I would take best roller over best turner, but NOT in case in which that best roller is extremely poor(worst imagineable) turner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the example I described, the spitfire is not in any way trying to attack. He is not in attack position. It's quite the opposite, he is UNDER attack by the 190 pilot who is diving down on him.

The topic was roll vs turn rate. So I describe a situation where turn rate and roll rate can be compared.

The 190 is diving down and while diving he is using ailerons to intercept the turning spitfire or if you will: Roll vs Turn rate.

Diving down from above on the turning spitfire, the 190 can turn (read roll) inside the spitfires turn, and he can roll (i.e. change directions) also much faster than the spitfire can rate around his turn circle. That is the situation where roll beats turn rate everytime. Even a slow roller can change directions faster in that situation than the fastest turner.

Ofcourse it's not only aileron that the 190 must use, he must also use his elevators to adjust for the intercept. But any 190 pilot will avoid using too much elevator and losing too much energy. Rolling costs a lot less energy than pulling back on the stick. (btw another thing that's advantageous in favour of rolling opposite turning: you lose a lot less energy by rolling than by turning).

Manu-6S
05-06-2007, 03:39 AM
Originally posted by Henkie327:

The 190 is diving down and while diving he is using ailerons to intercept the turning spitfire or if you will: Roll vs Turn rate.

Diving down from above on the turning spitfire, the 190 can turn (read roll) inside the spitfires turn, and he can roll (i.e. change directions) also much faster than the spitfire can rate around his turn circle. That is the situation where roll beats turn rate everytime. Even a slow roller can change directions faster in that situation than the fastest turner.

Ofcourse it's not only aileron that the 190 must use, he must also use his elevators to adjust for the intercept. But any 190 pilot will avoid using too much elevator and losing too much energy. Rolling costs a lot less energy than pulling back on the stick. (btw another thing that's advantageous in favour of rolling opposite turning: you lose a lot less energy by rolling than by turning).

Dont' worry, using rudder in Antons to aim a turning Spit you lose less energy than rolling and pulling the stick (never tried to lose speed in a FW190 by drifting?... you can't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif )

And again, rolling you don't change direction: you change direction then you use elevators, and in less way rudder (since you are drifting)

Henkie327
05-06-2007, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Henkie327:
Ofcourse you change directions by rolling. That is about the first thing you do when you want to change directions (rolling)


Ehmm... You aren't changing your vector by rolling: your nose is directed always in the same direction.

As Brain said: "FW190 rolls in front of a Spitfire - it continuosly passes in front of Spits cannons".

You mean the initial turn, where roll is only one of the factors with elevator authority.

And I quote another part of Brain's post, who I totally agree.


The point is that by doing this you are forcing a FW190 pilot to use his elevator to correct his aim, but hey that's not enough he also has to use his aileron right? How much E will he bleed and what will hapen if he miss? Can he make it?

How many time I saw a Spit in front of my FW190 who made almost a loop in front of me and I couldn't aim him because the plane shudders when I pull the stick? and even trying this I just lost energy and all my option is to fly straight (and usually diving, since the Spit is now on your 6 with tons of energy).

FW190 shudders, BF109 can't even do this since the controls are ineffective at high speed (450km/h...). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

First of all, the way you re orient your lift vector IS by rolling.

In the situation where a 190 (the attacker) is diving down vertically on a spitfire that is flatturning, there is no way that the flatturning plane is pointing guns on the attacker.

You are probably talking about a 190 in disadvantaged position, with a spitfire behind him. But I am talking about a 190 in advantageous position with him diving down on the spitfire. That's the difference.

Manu-6S
05-06-2007, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by Henkie327:
First of all, the way you re orient your lift vector IS by rolling.

In the situation where a 190 (the attacker) is diving down vertically on a spitfire that is flatturning, there is no way that the flatturning plane is pointing guns on the attacker.

You are probably talking about a 190 in disadvantaged position, with a spitfire behind him. But I am talking about a 190 in advantageous position with him diving down on the spitfire. That's the difference.

My other post above. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Henkie327
05-06-2007, 03:54 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
And again, rolling you don't change direction: you change direction then you use elevators, and in less way rudder (since you are drifting)

If you're diving down vertically while rolling, just take a look at your compass. See how fast you change directions. I think you will be surprised how fast you change directions by rolling.

Compare that with how fast the flatturning spitfire can rate around his circle. How much would that be? 20 degs/ sec. max? (I must guess here so it could be much lower)

I have no idea about how many degs/sec the roll rate of the 190 is, but my guess is that it's many times more than 20 degs/sec.

HellToupee
05-06-2007, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
D9's is pretty good however that is not a FockeWulf http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif it actually flies like a plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

and so do the others when u take off the blue tinted glasses http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif





Well you may want to check that out again, I've been using that extremely sucessfully since forever. Also why care about loosing speed, if the guy bounced you he will zoom up, by the time he repeats the pass you will reagin E, but at the bigger altitude, eventually if you keep calm and repeat nicely timed evasions, you may equal altitude with your attacker rather soon - I did that many times http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and ive been extreemly successful in shooting climbing turners since forever. If theres also more than 1 opponent its a death sentence. IF i cant get a shot on a climbing turner i dont try i go up and bring it over asap and shoot long range before they get speed, low speed no matter how hard one turns = easy peasy target, they can turn hard but diflection required is low.



Sure, only thing is that the D9 has to be at or over 400kmh and Tempest can do it at 240kmh http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. Besides I never saw a trial against a D9, however I did against the captured FW190A, the game looks rather funny in this regard, but there are other allied heavy weight champions that pwn Antons in turn without any historical base so it's not fair to point out the Tempest only http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

at 240kmh tempest turn time is over 30 seconds, best best turn time for temp is 350 vs 400 vs d9. It is fair to point out the tempest since well its the best of the allied heavy weights, p47 late can only equal the a9.

Brain32
05-06-2007, 05:14 AM
and so do the others when u take off the blue tinted glasses http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Maybe with the Red tinted glasses on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and ive been extreemly successful in shooting climbing turners since forever.
Too bad you fly Blue so rare(personally I never saw you) you would be my and everybody elses role model, because you would be the only one regulary shooting down spiral climbing Spitfires http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

at 240kmh tempest turn time is over 30 seconds
Maybe but with flaps down it can even get an angle on late 109's, Antons are long gone before that and Dora is toast too, and you know that very well http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p47 late can only equal the a9
I have yet to be outturned by any Anton while in a P47D_late, it's not even a competition, I just circle onto their six, generally I nail the Dora's too, but once I got outturned by one so I'm not completely sure, P51's are about equal to the Dora, Antons are toast though and Mustang3 is back in the Tempest region where even 109's are fuc*ed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
But we all know those planes were superb light low altitude turners they were basically designed for that, not speed or hi-alt performance or silly things like that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
05-06-2007, 10:19 AM
Yes you have to use elevator to tip the lift vector forward or back of you. To change direction
of the lift vector it is best to point up or down even half way and roll till your roof is facing
where you want to go then pull back into it. If your roll is slow then you can't be tight about
it and you won't track a fast mover. And NO, it's not good at low speed unless you have lots of
clear air under you but then no real tactic works in all situations.

A roll used to throw off close following enemy without getting shot up: barrel roll which puts
you on a corkscrew path that gives you a start on a turn to anywhere. It uses roll and lift at
the same time and yeah makes drag but is hard to target if you don't fly like parade drill.

HellToupee
05-06-2007, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
Too bad you fly Blue so rare(personally I never saw you) you would be my and everybody elses role model, because you would be the only one regulary shooting down spiral climbing Spitfires http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


the trick is learning to shoot.

I flown blue plently in the umm whats it 7 years this game has been around.



I have yet to be outturned by any Anton while in a P47D_late..

yet i have no problems in the antons staying with them, dora is very much better.



But we all know those planes were superb light low altitude turners they were basically designed for that, not speed or hi-alt performance or silly things like that Smile

yet they are not light low altitude turners in game unless u have blue tinted glasses on.

Brain32
05-06-2007, 12:41 PM
the trick is learning to shoot
Correct! We need to program guidance in our bullets, you obviously did as you can shppt a plane on whic you can't get an angle on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

yet i have no problems in the antons staying with them, dora is very much better
When was that? 7 years ago?

yet they are not light low altitude turners in game unless u have blue tinted glasses on.
Ah so you want to say they weren't seven yers ago, well I don't know I'm here only 4-ish http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif