PDA

View Full Version : what do you guys think of te hellcat in the game now.



fordfan25
04-03-2005, 06:12 PM
do you guys think its about right? the resone i ask is it SEEMS to handle ALOT like the F4u even at low speeds.

EnGaurde
04-03-2005, 06:21 PM
hmmm

my question in return is....

what should the hellcat be the result of?

1. popular, although very likely ignorant, opinion

or

2. the result of manufacturers data giving a result that is as accurate as possible whilst at the same time most likely terribly unpopular?

*throws hands in the air*

oye the big, big questions of our time...

fordfan25
04-03-2005, 06:37 PM
stop highjacking my thread and start your own lol j/k. well me i think it should be on hard data. one of the hard things to go by as far as data goes is how the planes handled. top speeds, excelaration ect is preaty stright forward i would think. pluse id like to see the other data such as reliabilty ect that was a major factor in ww2 be some how added.

EnGaurde
04-03-2005, 07:44 PM
i always thought that these high performance, high weight aircraft would be pigs to fly actually.

i looked at the amount of horsepower, the flight surfaces and assorted design parameters to make fast, rugged, war winning aircraft and i thought to myself day-amn, you would have to be on top of their every twitch otherwise they would sink their high performance teeth into your ar$e quick smart.

Take hi per cars and bikes.... often twitchy, ferocious beasts that need a firm, experienced and talented hand to push them. Otherwise we could all be Michael Schumachers / Valentino Rossis (especially the 500 two stroke GP bikes of old)? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

it stands to reason my idea has at least some merit.... the Ensign Eliminator anyone? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

and yet we have a flyable f4u that is a mere pussycat to land. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif That plane is unbelievably easy to fly.

i dont get that one. Thats why i look at any naval aircraft FM and think, well, who can say for sure.

i consider, that due to the requirements of selling software and the howls of armchair experts that most if not all aircraft have had their more unpleasant flight characteristics... er... "trimmed".

Or left out altogether by planned limitations of the FM? To make sure we can feel in control and not have the severe limitations of interacting thru very imprecise control systems make a truly real sim hopelessly difficult to fly seeing we have no real sensation of speed, or that precious seat of the pants feedback to guide us?

I'd bet the left one of two smallish but very dear to me bodyparts that its been dumbed down for us non trained flyers.... that can somehow manipulate these late war aircraft almost effortlessly.... and we should be able to, as well, if this sim is anywhere near "realistic".

meh.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Oilburner_TAW
04-03-2005, 09:14 PM
I never fly it unless forced to in a coop situation,etc.. The piss on the windshield has absolutely ruined this plane for me. For the love of all please somebody at 1C fix this ****.

fordfan25
04-03-2005, 09:21 PM
some many words yet you still manged to avoid giveing a awnser to the topic LMAO. "said as a frindly joke" i agree that the LOW speed handilig seems of on the f4u JUST going by MOST of the things that iv read over the years. the hellcat i always heard was a dream to fly at all speeds. i mean iv never even been in a plane ...and hopefully never will have to "scared of hights, can you believe it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif " but iv read and heard what people who have has wrought and stated.

fordfan25
04-03-2005, 09:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oilburner_TAW:
I never fly it unless forced to in a coop situation,etc.. The piss on the windshield has absolutely ruined this plane for me. For the love of all please somebody at 1C fix this ****. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

agreed. lol. it looks like the windshield of my mothers chevy after i have to drive it ....BAAARRRFFFF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

VW-IceFire
04-03-2005, 09:43 PM
Aside from the windshield, the Hellcat is a fantastic fighter in its element. But its no match for a 1945 scenario against German aircraft. Against the Japanese its much better off.

jarink
04-03-2005, 10:17 PM
I'm reading the book "First Blue" which is about Butch Voris, Hellcat ace and founding leader of the Blue Angels. He says one of the main reasons for them picking the F6F over the F4U was that the Hellcat was a much more 'honest' aircraft and easier to control precisely, especially at lower altitudes and speeds. I don't fly either plane enough (especially low and slow) to verify this in-game, can anyone else?

I'll get quotes and page numbers if anyone wants them.

fordfan25
04-03-2005, 10:41 PM
ok i know NONE of what im about to say realy counts seeing as it has to do with my skill but i just "tested" "i use the that term loosely lol" and from what i can tell the f4u and the hellcat in this game turn at low speed the same. if it was not for the cockpits i would not have any idea wich of the two planes i was in. i got down on the deck with full flaps and made a left banking turn. both seemed to be able "with some close supervision" to be able to make a constant turn at 120 MPH give or take a little. thay both have a tendansy to drop the nose and "slip" outa the air. alomost like thay were clones.that cant be right can it? now please dont think im complaining or even asking faor any kinda change. just kinda acourd to me. and thought id ask what every one hear thinks.

VBF-12_Whitey
04-03-2005, 11:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> both seemed to be able "with some close supervision" to be able to make a constant turn at 120 MPH give or take a little. thay both have a tendansy to drop the nose and "slip" outa the air. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Due to the weight of them, they should both slip out of the air around 120 MPH in a tight turn. The "Cat" and F4U both weigh around 11 to 12,000 lbs with decent loads. It was true that the Hellcat was a more stable to fly then the Corsair, but through production, they nearly eliminated problematic airflow that made the F4U earn the nickname "Ensign Killer". All in all, the "Cat" was the easier of the two to fly. The modelling of the two is pretty close, I just don't think they give the two enough speed. I own the Flight Manuals for the USN and RN Hellcat, and I never achieve the speeds they mention.

Badsight.
04-04-2005, 12:12 AM
have you tried on the top speed test map ?

Crimea , over water

Mr.Spot
04-04-2005, 02:32 AM
Try the rudder? I know lots of folks don't use rudder for targetting. WTF are they thinking? The guns have an X + Y axis and the Hellcat is an excellent gun platform.
Also, the Hellcat has a pretty good low speed turn. I've done lots of Hellcat time and except for the nasty high speed snaps it's an honest rig.
The F6F can B&Z just fine, but can't retain energy like the F4U.
You should be able to kill the **** out of my F4F, without blinking.

Woof!

Frequent_Flyer
04-04-2005, 07:49 AM
In game performance, relative to its primary advasary the Zero it does what it was designed to do, good handleing at slow speeds and superior handling to the Zero at higher speeds. In a dive, I think it either under performs or the Zero over performs.

WOLFMondo
04-04-2005, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Aside from the windshield, the Hellcat is a fantastic fighter in its element. But its no match for a 1945 scenario against German aircraft. Against the Japanese its much better off. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For a later war fighter its very slow. What gives? High HP engine, aerodynamics aren't bad but why is it so slow?

JG53Frankyboy
04-04-2005, 08:47 AM
not to forgett that reallive points doesnt count in online airquake-dogfivht areas:
-easy to fly
-easy to land (think about you came after 4-6 hours of flying tired home to your carrier and have to bring your plane safe on deck ! )
-reliable
-tough

the most pilots wanted come home alive - and the Hellcat made in that a good job.
also witrh the correct tactis it was suporiour over its main foe, still the Zero.

Kuikueg
04-04-2005, 09:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
ok i know NONE of what im about to say realy counts seeing as it has to do with my skill but i just "tested" "i use the that term loosely lol" and from what i can tell the f4u and the hellcat in this game turn at low speed the same. if it was not for the cockpits i would not have any idea wich of the two planes i was in. i got down on the deck with full flaps and made a left banking turn. both seemed to be able "with some close supervision" to be able to make a constant turn at 120 MPH give or take a little. thay both have a tendansy to drop the nose and "slip" outa the air. alomost like thay were clones.that cant be right can it? now please dont think im complaining or even asking faor any kinda change. just kinda acourd to me. and thought id ask what every one hear thinks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excuse me for this mate. You say really interesting things, but they are f@cking difficult to read through. At least to a Spaniard.

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 09:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kuikueg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
ok i know NONE of what im about to say realy counts seeing as it has to do with my skill but i just "tested" "i use the that term loosely lol" and from what i can tell the f4u and the hellcat in this game turn at low speed the same. if it was not for the cockpits i would not have any idea wich of the two planes i was in. i got down on the deck with full flaps and made a left banking turn. both seemed to be able "with some close supervision" to be able to make a constant turn at 120 MPH give or take a little. thay both have a tendansy to drop the nose and "slip" outa the air. alomost like thay were clones.that cant be right can it? now please dont think im complaining or even asking faor any kinda change. just kinda acourd to me. and thought id ask what every one hear thinks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excuse me for this mate. You say really interesting things, but they are f@cking difficult to read through. At least to a Spaniard. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


O well thats ok Spaniard's dont count any way lol im jokes of course http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. it was late last night and my spellings bad anyway. i blame the brits for comeing up with such ******ed ways of spelling things. to me it should be spelled like it sounds. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 09:47 AM
hmmm

i still dont think i got across my point?

after fighting against hellcats online, in a zero, i can say that the only kills i ever got were low and slow aka stupid pilots.

i agree.... perhaps the greatest yardstick anyone is ever going to be able to judge in any way that makes any sense is does it dominate the zero.

and yes, it does. Therefore, it has its main design intact.

arguing over a few mph top speed is purely academic and noone, can ever, say for sure because they simply didnt fly the plane.

quoting all manner of data and interpreting it in any and all fashions to prop up the latest speculative rant, is ridiculous, and when i see one starting i actively skip that thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

i still cant quite understand how i can successfully dogfight / bomb / strafe etc in an aircraft using only a micro$oft sidewinder pro for a controller.

i can flip this little baby around the sky like nothing. As no doubt countless others can.

on that, if this flight model is any way accurate ( im talking real world accurate) i should be able to strap into a real hellcat, get it off the deck, zoom around the sky employing all manner of "energy fighting tactics", zoom in for a landing trapping wires left right and centre. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

i can safely say that should i get the chance to pilot a real hellcat, god knows we all do at some point in our lives, i would never do it, simply due to the fact i would kill myself very quickly indeed. So much for real.

wanna know what i roooollly think?

No?

too bad this is a forum, you will sit there, read this, and like it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

i think the hellcat is a fair representation of what the plane could be like to fly, looking at sterile numbers and reading infamous pilot accounts. But when you argue over specifics, it really is removed so far from real life its just a huge waste of effort.


this modelling, indeed the last one as well, is as close as anyone can get. Who has the real world credentials to say any different eh?

NO ONE.

horseback
04-04-2005, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> For a later war fighter its very slow. What gives? High HP engine, aerodynamics aren't bad but why is it so slow? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because Oleg et al cannot accept the idea that anything that big could possibly be that nimble. The windshield is reportedly a matter of modelling error, but they've had a few patches to fix it and it hasn't happened, so I view it as an indicator of attitude, like the forward view from the 190's cockpit. Judging from the past, I have to expect that we are unlikely to see US carrier fighters ever reflect their actual strengths and virtues; for instance, the Hellcat had one of the best pilots' fields of view from the cockpit everywhere but directly to the rear because he sat higher than depicted in the sim. The pilot depicted in the sim would have to be under 5'3".

EnGaurde needs to remember one little thing-in real life, landing on a carrier is brutally difficult; aircraft designed to do so have to have excellent low speed handling, not merely good or adequate. Carrier aircraft also have to be more rugged than land based a/c as well as usually having folding wings, so there's a significant weight penalty before you start reaching for maximum performance with the same technology used for the land based fighters.

The Corsair was not that difficult or unforgiving to fly, but it had a long nose that made it hard to see the carrier/LSO at low speeds/high AOA, the initial production models had a tendency to stall at low speeds with an unpredictable wing drop (fixed with the installation of a small spoiler before September 1943), and early on, an excessive bounce on landing for carrier operations.

For land based operations, it was much more forgiving than the 109 (or the Mustang, for that matter) for landing and taxiing, and had much less of a stall problem than the 190 at all speeds. By carrier Navy standards, it had some problems, especially when compared to the Hellcat, but it was a pussycat compared to most land based fighters of similar performance.

The F6F was considered by far the easiest aircraft in the Allied inventory to master and fly well; by all accounts, it was the closest thing out there to a viceless high performance fighter. While its top end was 20-30km slower than the Corsair's, in combat, you rarely flew straight and level for any length of time. Accelleration is more important most of the time. It was a very formidible all around fighter below 20,000ft, and the F6F-5 of mid/late '44 was even faster and more maneuverable than the -3.

It had none of the Corsair's real or imagined faults, and was much more easily maintained; carrier units reported an 'up' rate of over 90%, and it still had a significant margin of performance over Japanese fighters. That was why the US Navy preferred the Hellcat for its carriers.

I'd love to see the Hellcat depicted accurately in a flight sim, but I don't expect to see it in PF. There's a residual bitterness over the Northrup-Grumman extortion thing.

cheers

horseback

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 10:22 AM
EnGaurde:"you want the real flight model of the hellcat".

Fordfan:"I think I deserve the real flight model of the hellcat".

Real HellCat pilot: "You cant handle the real flight model of the hellcat. None of you untrained, joystick grasping computer screen pilots could. Sheesh. If so, why would Navy pilots need so much training? Hot da-mn, lets get the squads mascot up here in the cockpit! Anybody can fly this da-mn thing!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

jarink
04-04-2005, 11:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
EnGaurde:"you want the real flight model of the hellcat".

Fordfan:"I think I deserve the real flight model of the hellcat".

Real HellCat pilot: "You cant handle the real flight model of the hellcat. None of you untrained, joystick grasping computer screen pilots could. Sheesh. If so, why would Navy pilots need so much training? Hot da-mn, lets get the squads mascot up here in the cockpit! Anybody can fly this da-mn thing!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm, I think there's probably more real-life pilots here than you'd expect in a gaming forum. (For the record, I am not a pilot, but I have gone through some ground school and about 60hrs of informal flight instruction, so I'm not totally clueless.)
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Of course flying any plane in a computer game is going to be easier than in real life. Simplifications have to be made so that the game will run on something less than a small farm of Crays. I think the issue here is whether or not the different aircraft handling charateristics have been oversimplified to the point that the FMs are pretty much generic and not really representative of individual models.

Blueknight1964
04-04-2005, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> For a later war fighter its very slow. What gives? High HP engine, aerodynamics aren't bad but why is it so slow? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because Oleg et al cannot accept the idea that anything that big could _possibly_ be that nimble. The windshield is reportedly a matter of modelling error, but they've had a few patches to fix it and it hasn't happened, so I view it as an indicator of attitude, like the forward view from the 190's cockpit. Judging from the past, I have to expect that we are unlikely to see US carrier fighters ever reflect their actual strengths and virtues; for instance, the Hellcat had one of the best pilots' fields of view from the cockpit everywhere but directly to the rear because he sat higher than depicted in the sim. The pilot depicted in the sim would have to be under 5'3".

EnGaurde needs to remember one little thing-in real life, landing on a carrier is brutally difficult; aircraft designed to do so have to have _excellent_ low speed handling, not merely good or adequate. Carrier aircraft also have to be more rugged than land based a/c as well as usually having folding wings, so there's a significant weight penalty before you start reaching for maximum performance with the same technology used for the land based fighters.

The Corsair was not that difficult or unforgiving to fly, but it had a long nose that made it hard to see the carrier/LSO at low speeds/high AOA, the initial production models had a tendency to stall at low speeds with an unpredictable wing drop (fixed with the installation of a small spoiler before September 1943), and early on, an excessive bounce on landing _for carrier operations._

For land based operations, it was much more forgiving than the 109 (or the Mustang, for that matter) for landing and taxiing, and had much less of a stall problem than the 190 at all speeds. By carrier Navy standards, it had some problems, especially when compared to the Hellcat, but it was a pussycat compared to most land based fighters of similar performance.

The F6F was considered by far the easiest aircraft in the Allied inventory to master and fly well; by all accounts, it was the closest thing out there to a viceless high performance fighter. While its top end was 20-30km slower than the Corsair's, in combat, you rarely flew straight and level for any length of time. Accelleration is more important most of the time. It was a very formidible all around fighter below 20,000ft, and the F6F-5 of mid/late '44 was even faster and more maneuverable than the -3.

It had none of the Corsair's real or imagined faults, and was much more easily maintained; carrier units reported an 'up' rate of over 90%, and it still had a significant margin of performance over Japanese fighters. That was why the US Navy preferred the Hellcat for its carriers.

I'd love to see the Hellcat depicted accurately in a flight sim, but I don't expect to see it in PF. There's a residual bitterness over the Northrup-Grumman extortion thing.

cheers

horseback <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


An excellent post and to the point.

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 03:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
EnGaurde:"you want the real flight model of the hellcat".

Fordfan:"I think I deserve the real flight model of the hellcat".

Real HellCat pilot: "You cant handle the real flight model of the hellcat. None of you untrained, joystick grasping computer screen pilots could. Sheesh. If so, why would Navy pilots need so much training? Hot da-mn, lets get the squads mascot up here in the cockpit! Anybody can fly this da-mn thing!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


i know you were jokeing around LMAO.but like i said i didnt ask for them to change anything. i was just woundering what others thought. i think mabey you might have misunderstood me. to be honst as far as the hellcat's go i think the thing i would want changed if i was asked would be the excelaration to be uped a bit like the corsair it just "SEEMS" to be a real dog.. actully the only thing i would realy like to see is more online fightes aginst its main advacary the zero and not the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's that the poor cat has to fight every frickn day lol. by the way speaking of KI84 infastations what happend to warbirds pt_lw server on HL i havent seen it in a few weeks.

one thing also i would like to see is more 43 and 44 J fighters to fly aginst. varity is the spice and all that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG53Frankyboy
04-04-2005, 03:49 PM
true , in VOW2 pacific missions the matchup between Hellcats and Reisen-52s is always a good one - each side can win.

and over Kyushu 1945 Hiens vs Hellcats , also fun.

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 03:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's that the poor cat has to fight every frickn day lol. by the way speaking of KI84 infastations <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

aah the Ki84.

lets get aboard a plane that will give the most ferocious wedgie to just about any american plane. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

if it was human, it would kiss both fists and have that maniacal glint in its blood red eye...

i loved chasing down p38s, jugs, mustangs, corsairs.

aah. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

the whining about how its so uber was like music to my ears... instead of handing out the spanking, the amerifans copped a buttload themselves.

but alas, it was not to be.

all good things, must come to an end.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 04:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's that the poor cat has to fight every frickn day lol. by the way speaking of KI84 infastations <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

aah the Ki84.

lets get aboard a plane that will give the most ferocious wedgie to just about any american plane. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

if it was human, it would kiss both fists and have that maniacal glint in its blood red eye...

i loved chasing down p38s, jugs, mustangs, corsairs.

aah. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

the whining about how its so uber was like music to my ears... instead of handing out the spanking, the amerifans copped a buttload themselves.

but alas, it was not to be.

all good things, must come to an end.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes it will spank the US planes that are in the game now. unlike the germans and japo's we dont have our super uber fighters that were purduced in even greater numbers and saw more combat. like the p47n/m f4u-4. and though just like a number of german and jap'o fighters that are actully in the game but saw no to very little fighting, the p51H and bear as well as tiger cats that didnt see combat but were made in numbers and were in flight are also left out.

the fact is that when our uber planes are brought up every axies flyer in the known world comes crawling outa the wood work to protest yet thay are in most cases the same ones who scoff at people who coplain about there uber fighters domanating servers in fanatasy numbers. kinda a double standerd.

id just like to hear some of the whining that the axies fliers would be spouting if things were a little more historical and true to life. heck i already do in any historical server that puts the zero aginst the hellcat.all i hear is how the zero flams and cant keep up. seems the fact that it can still turn loops around the hellcat and win almost any "dogfight" doesnt get mentuned. O we just cant have that. o no sir. the USA could not have had as good or better stuff than us no way thats just propaganda. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif .

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 05:30 PM
hey im all for accurate recreations of situations.

but the sad fact of the matter is, that most dogfight servers dont follow accurate order of battle representations.

if they did, what youd get would be hordes of navy aircraft vs a smattering of hinomarus.

not fun, eh.

what i think it does indicate, is what the late war would have been like should more numbers of higher performance aircraft been available.

whats wrong with equal numbers of late war japanese aircraft giving a fairer fight?

id get darn bored if i could slew thru the sky in my ride, zapping woefully inadequate aicraft left and right.

at least the sweet Ki84s put up a bit of a fight, force the jugs and the mustangs to fear something swatting them into iddy biddy bits in the blink of an eye?

Unless you're recreating a scenario, there aint nuthin wrong with lots of Ki's. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

horseback
04-04-2005, 05:47 PM
The Ki-84 FM in this sim is almost as imaginary as the 109Z's. While it was a good late-war fighter on those rare occasions when the engine worked, the fuel wasn't hopelessly fouled and the pilot was reasonably competent, the remarkably optimistic Japanese evaluations appear to be Oleg's only source of flight data.

The Japanese in late WWII were even more invested in the idea of a miracle weapon that would get them out of their mess than the most dedicated Nazi, and for far less reason. Production models of all late war Japanese aircraft were so plagued by shoddy workmanship that most of their FMs are strictly a matter for conjecture.

I often hear about apocryphal US evals providing shocking results, but they never cite a specific verifiable source nor do they provide specific flight data that can be quantified and compared directly to Allied fighters.

This is no doubt due to the CIA suppressing this valuable info that might otherwise have prompted some weak kneed wusses to go back and surrender to the Emperor.

cheers

horseback

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 06:11 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by EnGaurde:
hey im all for accurate recreations of situations.

but the sad fact of the matter is, that most dogfight servers dont follow accurate order of battle representations.

if they did, what youd get would be hordes of navy aircraft vs a smattering of hinomarus.

not fun, eh.

what i think it does indicate, is what the late war would have been like should more numbers of higher performance aircraft been available.

whats wrong with equal numbers of late war japanese aircraft giving a fairer fight?

id get darn _bored_ if i could slew thru the sky in my ride, zapping woefully inadequate aicraft left and right.

at least the sweet Ki84s put up a bit of a fight, force the jugs and the mustangs to fear something swatting them into iddy biddy bits in the blink of an eye?

Unless you're recreating a scenario, there aint nuthin wrong with lots of Ki's. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/QUOTE

so your saying its ok to use the ki84s ALOT to add a ballence to the play right. but that there suports the arguments for the -4 and the -47N's as well as bearcats. the ki84 does not just ballnce things out. its as fast as all the us plane if not faster. its more manuverble.and its cannons give it the instakill abilty that more than nagates the US planes toughness. thats why i say the later war US planes would be great to have in this gam. or at least get the other late war J planes in like the J2m2 and NkN1 "i think thats there names sorry" . the ki84A i dont have a problem with neer as much. because its at least got a vise in that its cannon are not 30mm in the wings and have limated ammo and no 20mm in the nose just Mguns yet its still fast and turns great.im not anti Japan or german. in fact the german people as a whole are actully quit intersting to me. but fair is fair and history is history and in my opinion this game is lacking in this case both. i dont want the USA to have a desisive advantege any more than i do any one else. but when your in a cat or hog and you go up aginst a ki84c if the other pilot is any good at all and not a tottal noob you have about a 10% chance of wining. you cant out run him or out turn him. hes better in the vertical. his guns can easyly kill you in a heart bet. at least with the zero VS hellcat the zero has the manuvering advantge. and even wild cat vs zero i dont mind because the toughness of the wildcat is usefull seeing as the zero is not a flying deathstar cannon lol.

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 06:21 PM
ki84 is the japanese bf109Z?

huh?

thats a tad optomistic to equate the two.

no, actually its outright ludicrous to make the claim.

i can recall several real war accounts of Ki84s in combat, and the accounts were glowing. Reviews of it, those raw numbers we all inevitably fall back on, indicate it would have been competitive, hardly an utter failure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

though then again, what can be believed eh?

when someone drags the CIA in (http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif) i start to think of little green men and russian submarines kidnapping australian prime ministers, that is if the CIA didnt kill them first for opposing the war in vietnam.

lets not confuse the aircrafts abilities and its handicap from its environment. Thats just so short sighted its laughable.

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 06:32 PM
what????? russain subs kidnaped australian prime ministers. ...!!!!!! we cant stand for this wait....does that effect if thay will make a croc dundie 4 movie........what about the croc hunter...OMG we must put a stop to this....TO WAR I SAY.

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 06:35 PM
ford, all the reason why the ki84 is hated, is because it does to allied planes what allied planes have always done to japanese types. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

that is, has all the advantages in firepower and maneouverability. That irks many a computer flier:

*slams soft pudgy computer nerd fist onto table and squeaks in a very high testosterone free voice:

But we won the war ! I cant be shot down by japanese planes so easily ! This is wrong ! Where are those forums ! I should win !*

seriously tho, as for speed.... dont know about that one, ive been outpaced by many mustangs and jugs in a game of dive away and catch up.

the hellcat, unfortunately suffers badly at the hands of the Ki. Though having said that, it can certainly claim its share if the Ki is flown carelessly.

hmmm id equate it to the hellcat / zero situation.... but in reverse? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 06:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
ford, all the reason why the ki84 is hated, is because it does to allied planes what allied planes have always done to japanese types. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"that is, has all the advantages in firepower and maneouverability. That irks many a computer flier:"

*slams soft pudgy computer nerd fist onto table and squeaks in a very high testosterone free voice:

But we won the war ! I cant be shot down by japanese planes so easily ! This is wrong ! Where are those forums ! I should win !*

seriously tho, as for speed.... dont know about that one, ive been outpaced by many mustangs and jugs in a game of dive away and catch up.

the hellcat, unfortunately suffers badly at the hands of the Ki. Though having said that, it can certainly claim its share if the Ki is flown carelessly.

hmmm id equate it to the hellcat / zero situation.... but in reverse? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


well i got a few frindly proplems with some of that. like when you said.

"that is, has all the advantages in firepower and maneouverability. That irks many a computer flier:"


thats not thecase in almost any other Jvs A match up. the J planes are almost always more manuvrble and have thanks to there cannons the same firw power. thay hit harder in a shorter amount of time but dont have the staying power because of lower ammo, the US planes are in ealy and mid war years faster and tougher. its kinda like a some one did ballnceing act. how ever the ki84 is better in ALL feilds in the type of fighting online.


"hmmm id equate it to the hellcat / zero situation.... but in reverse? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif[/QUOTE]"

I wouldnt. because like i said in the HC/zero situation not only is it more historicle BUT also like i said its a strong VS weak points of both

hellcat =speed, toughness,ammo capacaty.
zero= manverbilty, climrate,faster excelaration,and cannon stoping power.

but you dont get that with the KI84 B and Cs vs what the USA flyers have in the game right now. the thing is IF the war had draged on and the ki84s were made in anywear neer the numbers thay are in this game online then by that time thay would be faceing alot of -4 hogs p-47Ns bear and maby tiger cats, p51H and probly even a number of p-80s but thats not the case now. just like online in a dogfight room were every one is flying la-7s and try to fly a US fighter. by the time the USA woulda went to war with russia then those la-7's ect woulda been faceing large numbers of some of the planes i listed above and not just the *relativly* ouyt dated ones that thay do now. i mean heck other than small cosmedic and other tiny changes the latest p51 and p47s we have in the game now were almost the same that were in 1943 right?


"sorry about my spelling ect im wrighting this and cooking diner at the same time lol"

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-04-2005, 07:35 PM
The flight models in this game are quite good. The reality is they could be more accurate and, by proxy, nearly impossible for a large percentage of the people that buy this game and fly it recreationally. I AM a pilot and have a few hours in WWII AT-6 trainers (though no real fighters).

Oleg has stated that the new to-be-released flight models in the pending patch are more complicated thus being a bit more accurate than what we currently have. They will undoubtedly be more difficult to fly also. The earlier post that speaks of the Hellcat's abilities in the right hands is spot-on though most records show it to be faster in real life than is currently represented in-game. The hellcat was also a pack-fighter that rarely saw the stragglers and 1v1, 1v2 engagements that permeate this sim online and off. There is always that great intangible of tactics.

The bottom line is that if you aren't satisfied with the way it is and want to see it looked at seriously, you need to provide records, documents and any other respected data to support any criticisms.

I feel it's darned good as is provided certain doctrine are followed...but that glass is unforgivable. It must be fixed...period.


TB

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 08:10 PM
aah.

now this man should be listened to, seeing he has had some time in a period aircraft. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

frankly, the FM? i'd want it razor sharp and unforgiving. Of course that wont happen as the dollars from the 2 minute experts / console kids would dry up.

gimme the real thing, and my sense of satisfaction in achieving something, anything would be immense. I just dont accept i can fly successfully in furballs with no rudder pedals, no full length control column, no engine controls etc. It just sticks with me to fight bitterly over minor points of performance when the whole control system is so glaringly simplified.

if i needed to get a stick and rudder control system set up to give me that fine tuning, id darn well get it. Nurse the plane thru the air, not backhand viciously and have it meekly comply?

perhaps a switchable FM that has been tweaked with no nod to system hit.... forcing smaller flights of planes, but making you read flight manuals to understand why you depart controlled flight whereas before you achieved that impossible 90 degree deflection via rudder kick shot...

horseback
04-04-2005, 08:35 PM
Those "glowing accounts" of the Hayate's performance in combat EnGaurde speaks of were all Japanese; and the Japanese always overclaimed by a minimum of 7 claims for every actual victory, regardless of unit experience levels, in contrast to almost every other nation's air forces, who became more accurate about their claims with experience.

Japanese commanders made blunder after blunder based on their aircrew's claims, believing that Allied losses were much greater than they actually were.

By the point in the war when the Hayate arrived, getting out of a fight with a whole skin was a major accomplishment for them, and Japanese military culture placed a lot higher value on what you do to the enemy rather than what he does to you. So Japanese units taking 60-80% losses on every mission made much more of a to do about inflicting two or three kills on the enemy for four or five losses and felt much more positively about their performance than the Western units who hated taking any losses, regardless of the ratio in their favor.

In actual operations and performance, Hellcats were essentially the equal to the Ki 84 in most respects, and vastly superior due to the quality of its pilots. Most of those fabled battles that Japanese units claimed great 'victories' in were rarely confirmed by US casualty lists; at best, a veteran IJAAF unit might have come off even against a 'green' Hellcat squadron or flight.

Again, we are talking about comparative values. The 'deficiency' of the Hellcat was that since it wasn't (much) faster than the Hayate, it couldn't run one down that had a half mile (800m) lead the way a P-38, Mustang, -4 Corsair, or Thunderbolt could. Conversely, the Hayate driver couldn't expect to chase down a Hellcat aware of his presence, either. This hardly means that either aircraft was helpless in the other's hands.

There is a need for a cultural filter when assessing Japanese claims about their aces and their planes that is sadly lacking here.

As for the cracks about testosterone deficiencies, I'll say what my father said to me about thirty years ago when I was about EnGaurde's apparent age: I've got more hair growing in my ears than you'll ever have on your chest!

cheers

horseback

Hendley
04-04-2005, 08:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horseback:
The Ki-84 FM in this sim is almost as imaginary as the 109Z's. While it was a good late-war fighter on those rare occasions when the engine worked, the fuel wasn't hopelessly fouled and the pilot was reasonably competent, the remarkably optimistic Japanese evaluations appear to be Oleg's only source of flight data.
<snip>
I often hear about apocryphal US evals providing shocking results, but they never cite a specific verifiable source nor do they provide specific flight data that can be quantified and compared directly to Allied fighters.

This is no doubt due to the CIA suppressing this valuable info... <snip>cheers

horseback <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With all due respect, this is all so wrong I don't know where to begin... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The Japanese figures for Ki84 performance were _lower_ than the Americans' own testing. Namely:

- Japanese tests on early production model: 388mph
(this is the most common figure cited in reference works)
- US TAIC tests on captured Ki-84: 422mph
- Wright field tests: 427mph

Current research/thinking (on j-aircraft.com and elsewhere) suggests that the Japanese performance data may be without water-meth injection. The 422mph of the US was achieved using water-meth and Japanese 92 octane fuel.

Ergo, if Oleg is using the Japanese figures, the Ki84 is _undermodelled_. (Incidentally, the case is similar to the C6N Myrt reconnaissance plane; when tested by the US, it was some 60km or so _faster_ than reported by the Japanese, simply thanks to being loaded with decent fuel.)

You said it yourself: in 1945, the Japanese air forces (navy and army) were undermanned, had poor fuel, suffered from poor maintenance and workmanship and were vastly outnumbered. But guess what? None of that is modelled in the sim.

Even up the teams, give the planes the same fuel and workmanship, throw them into a dogfight and lo! some Japanese planes are pretty darn good, and may, even (*gasp*) be better than some US planes! Is that so hard to acknowledge?

This data and facts are out there IF you are genuinely interested; no digging around CIA vaults required. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 09:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> As for the cracks about testosterone deficiencies, I'll say what my father said to me about thirty years ago when I was about EnGaurde's apparent age: I've got more hair growing in my ears than you'll ever have on your chest!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

baah hahahah nice age related quip. But you do know all that means is you'll die earlier, and then whos gonna gaurd your daughters window at night...

this is an internet forum peoples..... sticks and stones?

and for the record champ, im older, and smarter than than i sound..... sure beats sounding smarter than i am. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

horseback
04-04-2005, 09:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> As for the cracks about testosterone deficiencies, I'll say what my father said to me about thirty years ago when I was about EnGaurde's apparent age: I've got more hair growing in my ears than you'll ever have on your chest! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

baah hahahah nice age related quip. But you _do_ know all that means is you'll die earlier, and then whos gonna gaurd your daughters window at night...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're assuming that I won't catch you in the vicinity of my (totally imaginary-we hairy eared types generally father hairy eared sons-) daughter's window if you expect to outlast me.

cheers

horseback

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 09:10 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

fordfan25
04-04-2005, 10:21 PM
you both may want to tighten secrity in your daughters room. i find it very unchallenging. by the way. you may want to take them down to the local healh clinc. may have some little fords runnin around hehehehehe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

EnGaurde
04-04-2005, 10:36 PM
heheheh sneaky sneaky now ford hmmm?

im just happy i hijacked fords hellcat thread into a Ki84 / hellcat blend.

IJA / IJN infiltrators are everywhere... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

IL2-chuter
04-05-2005, 02:04 AM
Concerning the Hellcat's published top speed. It was achieved at 100% (military) power, NOT emergency (WEP) power. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Concerning the Frank. It was the most popular ride among the test pilots at Freeman Field because it was fast, maneuverable and reliable. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif (I don't know if Oleg tapped any of the Freeman Field reports. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif)

Concerning me. I got my pilot's license in 1976. Taildragger lover and NOT ASHAMED of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif But ya can't freakin ground loop in the game. . . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif . . . and stalls are more of a (left or right) wing drop (sorta snaprollish without the yaw) than a nose drop . . . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif . . .

Still waitin for the Mega- http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Badsight.
04-05-2005, 03:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
and not the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok says who ?

& based on what ?

& have you even bothered to test it ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>the fact is that when our uber planes are brought up every axies flyer in the known world comes crawling outa the wood work to protest yet thay are in most cases the same ones who scoff at people who coplain about there uber fighters domanating servers in fanatasy numbers. kinda a double standerd. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok now thats just BS , the ones who dont want the Tigercat or the Bearcat or the H Mustang are the "realisim-only" tards

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>id just like to hear some of the whining that the axies fliers would be spouting if things were a little more historical and true to life <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok first of all your confusing RL senarios with DF rooms , not gunna happen buddy

second of all , do please tell me how the Hellcat doesnt end up realistic or true to life against heins & Zekes RIGHT NOW . . . . . . . seeing as how those 3 are hitting their speed & climb JUST RIGHT

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>all i hear is how the zero flams and cant keep up. seems the fact that it can still turn loops around the hellcat and win almost any "dogfight" doesnt get mentuned <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>dude , are you INSANE

you want a Zero in the shape of a F6F it sounds like , i mean come on , the hellcat was never better at what the zero was good at ,try to fly REALISTICALLY & you too will se the EXACT same thing other posters have said

but to do this *ahem* requires patience , discipline & more discipline again on top of that , in other words give up your complaining till you have mastered E-Fighting , as you have found out already , just yanking on the JS aint going to work

Badsight.
04-05-2005, 03:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horseback:
Production models of all late war Japanese aircraft were so plagued by shoddy workmanship that most of their FMs are strictly a matter for conjecture.

I often hear about apocryphal US evals providing shocking results, but they never cite a specific verifiable source nor do they provide specific flight data that can be quantified and compared directly to Allied fighters. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>wow , thats jaw-dropping stuff

you have zero actual knowledge on the subject , or so it would seem

seriously

EnGaurde
04-05-2005, 04:42 AM
woooo lookout, the wolves have arrived...

horseback
04-05-2005, 10:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horseback:
Production models of all late war Japanese aircraft were so plagued by shoddy workmanship that most of their FMs are strictly a matter for conjecture.

I often hear about apocryphal US evals providing shocking results, but they never cite a specific verifiable source nor do they provide specific flight data that can be quantified and compared directly to Allied fighters. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>wow , thats jaw-dropping stuff

you have zero actual knowledge on the subject , or so it would seem

seriously <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Clearly sarcasm is wasted on you.

I've read Francillon's book, Green & Swanborough, Gunston, and the various permutations of Osprey's painfully uncritical Aircraft of the Aces for the Japanese aces, and I was hand painting the kanji 'No Step' characters on Hasegawa 1/72nd scale Franks long before you were potty trained. No hard data to indicate that the Ki-84 was in any way the superfighter we find in FB/AEP/PF. Way better than previous Japanese fighters, but barely in the same class as the best Allied late war fighters; a little slower, and flat out anemic at the higher altitudes.

Ever wonder why the Frank wasn't considered more of a B-29 killer than the Ki-61 Hien?-because it wasn't. The Ki-84 in the sim should be capable of blowing through the escorts and taking out a few bombers with some consistancy, but the real thing couldn't fight effectively at the higher altitudes. Nakajima and the Koko Hombu went to a lot of trouble trying to find a way to turbocharge the Frank's engine with no success.

So where's the specific data? So far, I see a couple of anecdotes and a couple of insults. The usual vague "everybody knows" BS that relieves you of the responsiblity of a direct answer. Where's the solid documentation that makes me so ignorant?

Show me a US military/government source or a book by a reputable author with solid verifiable numbers. If systematic tests were made by the Allies, a report was generated with direct comparisons to standard Allied fighters, along with suggested counters to the Frank's capabilities for each type.

...and I don't want to hear how ONE example flew with Champion spark plugs, a Mopar oil filter and a Hamilton Standard prop to replace the stock Sumitomo; we sent a bunch of examples of the Frank back to the States after we took the Phillippines back in late 1944, so I want to know what the average production Frank could do with stock parts. It would also be instructive to see how many aircraft had to be cannibalized in order to produce one example that could be flown safely (a standard bit of information for these kinds of reports).

The lack of a widely recognized & distributed report issued prior to the invasion of Okinawa suggests to me that they couldn't put together a single reliable aircraft that could be safely tested without wholesale replacement of stock parts with US built analogs, rendering test results done with replacement parts just a bit questionable.

cheers

horseback

Hendley
04-05-2005, 11:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horseback:

I've read Francillon's book, Green & Swanborough, Gunston, and the various permutations of Osprey's painfully uncritical Aircraft of the Aces for the Japanese aces, and I was hand painting the kanji 'No Step' characters on Hasegawa 1/72nd scale Franks long before you were potty trained.
<snip>
No hard data to indicate that the Ki-84 was in any way the superfighter we find in FB/AEP/PF. Way better than previous Japanese fighters, but barely in the same class as the best Allied late war fighters; a little slower, and flat out anemic at the higher altitudes.
<snip>
So where's the specific data? So far, I see a couple of anecdotes and a couple of insults. The usual vague "everybody knows" BS that relieves you of the responsiblity of a direct answer... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The (US) Technical Air Intelligence Center reports are the main source for Ki84 performance figures, and were better than the Japanese catalog numbers in most respects. Your assertion that Oleg's FM is based on exaggerated Japanese figures is clearly absurd, because the US figures were in the most case, better than the IJA's own...

You've clearly made up your mind about the topic, but the anecdotes and "everyone knows" assertions are flowing both ways here (the "Japanese ALWAYS overclaimed by a minimum of 7 claims for every actual victory"? Come on, where did THAT come from??)

If you're saying Francillion, Green & Swanborough, Gunston, et al ("received wisdom") are wrong (not sure if you are, though...), then fair enough, but surely it's up to the naysayer to produce the figures that demonstrate them wrong?

BTW, the "no step" was written in katakana so you might want to fix that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Blueknight1964
04-05-2005, 11:43 AM
In total, the Hellcat shot down over 6,000 Japanese aircraft. Thee bulk of these (4,947) were by carrier based Hellcats, the rest were by land based F6F's or F6F's flown by the pilots from other nations. It was the F6F Hellcat that participated in the 'Great Marianas Turkey Shoot' in June 1944. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/grumman_f6f_hellcat.htm

Looks to me like a mighty fine plane in RL, shame it doesnt have the power in the game that it had in RL.

I looked for any type of war record for the Frank and couldnt find how many kills, ect.

I guess what I,m saying is that if your going to model the Frank in shall we say perfect conditions model all aircraft equally.

And for goodness sake fix the goo on the windscreen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

horseback
04-05-2005, 12:08 PM
The best of many typical generalizations on line, taken from http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki-84.html

"In 1946, a captured late-production Hayate was restored and tested at the Middletown Air Depot in Pennsylvania. At a weight of 7490 pounds, the aircraft achieved a maximum speed of 427 mph at 20,000 feet, using war emergency power. This speed exceeded that of the P-51D Mustand and the P-47D at that altitude by 2 mph and 22 mph respectively. These figures were achieved with a superbly maintained and restored aircraft and with highly-refined aviation gasoline, and were not typical of Japanese-operated aircraft during the later stages of the war." (italics mine)

Every source I've read, and there are many more than I have listed, speaks glowingly of the Frank's capabilities, and then contradict their descriptions with the specifications. You beat the Frank the same way you always beat Japanese fighters: get high, stay fast, hit, extend-repeat as necessary. The Frank's rep is based on its contrast to other Japanese types, not significantly superior overall performance.

cheers

horseback

EnGaurde
04-05-2005, 02:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> BTW, the "no step" was written in katakana so you might want to fix that <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

fordfan25
04-05-2005, 03:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
and not the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok says who ?

& based on what ?

& have you even bothered to test it ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>the fact is that when our uber planes are brought up every axies flyer in the known world comes crawling outa the wood work to protest yet thay are in most cases the same ones who scoff at people who coplain about there uber fighters domanating servers in fanatasy numbers. kinda a double standerd. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok now thats just BS , the ones who dont want the Tigercat or the Bearcat or the H Mustang are the "realisim-only" tards

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>id just like to hear some of the whining that the axies fliers would be spouting if things were a little more historical and true to life <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ok first of all your confusing RL senarios with DF rooms , not gunna happen buddy

second of all , do please tell me how the Hellcat doesnt end up realistic or true to life against heins & Zekes RIGHT NOW . . . . . . . seeing as how those 3 are hitting their speed & climb JUST RIGHT

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>all i hear is how the zero flams and cant keep up. seems the fact that it can still turn loops around the hellcat and win almost any "dogfight" doesnt get mentuned <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>dude , are you INSANE

you want a Zero in the shape of a F6F it sounds like , i mean come on , the hellcat was never better at what the zero was good at ,try to fly REALISTICALLY & you too will se the EXACT same thing other posters have said

but to do this *ahem* requires patience , discipline & more discipline again on top of that , in other words give up your complaining till you have mastered E-Fighting , as you have found out already , just yanking on the JS aint going to work <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



OMG have you got just about every thing i said flip floped it aint even funny.

"& based on what ?

& have you even bothered to test it ?"

ok ill try to strighten this out best i can. #1 based on history"im not going to go threw looking the crapola up again "

what do you mean test it?


"ok now thats just BS , the ones who dont want the Tigercat or the Bearcat or the H Mustang are the "realisim-only" tards"

maby. i just remember every body and there mother going nuts every time there was a thread on the f4u-4 and p47 N. again im not going to go on a long search looking for quots from months ago but I remember.


"you want a Zero in the shape of a F6F it sounds like , i mean come on , the hellcat was never better at what the zero was good at ,try to fly REALISTICALLY & you too will se the EXACT same thing other posters have said"

i never said any thing about the zero should not out turn the hellcat or that eather was over or undermoddled other than MABY the excell rate on the HC. in fact i was pointing out that a match up between the zero and hellcat was alot more even than a ki84 vs hellcat in that the zero and cat both seem to work off of each others strengths and weakness's. and that the zero was the main adversairy to the cat. i do fly REALISTICALLY thank you. and by the way if you cant speak with out makeing smart a$$ snide comments like that please just stay outa my threads and dont adress me in others.


"but to do this *ahem* requires patience , discipline & more discipline again on top of that , in other words give up your complaining till you have mastered E-Fighting , as you have found out already , just yanking on the JS aint going to work[/QUOTE]"

ok i do have patience ect. iv been useing this sim sence FB first came out and actully i do very well online when not going up aginst hords of ki84Cs in a hellcat.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif also i hate to stop your self richous super ego trip but i was not complaining about the cat. just pointed out that it and the f4u fly almost if not the same.the ki was brought up and i have not even said its fm was over moddled just that going up aginst is in -1 sairs and hellcats in the astarnomicle numbers that thay are often in during online servers is not only unhistoricle but unballenced as well. in that aginst those versions of the sair and cat it has no real weakness that can be exploited. with the zero it can tun great but its speed is low. while the cat cant out turn a zero it can out run it.

maby if you have some of that patience you told me about you would take a little time in reading threw my earlyer post and not jump to the conclussian that im complaining about FMs ect and think you have a chance to tell some body how it is.

now i dont want to have a problem with you or any one else in here. this should be a place for fun and hanging with friends so please chill on the remarks and youll find im not such a bad guy. in fact i mostly go outa my way to be nice and friendly most of the time.

DIRTY-MAC
04-05-2005, 04:28 PM
Well the Ki-84 was better than the hellcat.
but I dont really see the fuzz about it,
there are plenty of better fighters in the game than the Ki-84, especially your for example
the P-51D,p47 and F4U
if properly flown, there shouldnt be a problem with the Ki-84,
and I must say, if online its not the Ki-84C
I fear,

there are far more dangerous opponents,
the Ki-84C is just a fairly good furball fighter,

and about its "uber" guns,
you should avoid to be shot at,
from the beginning anyway

fordfan25
04-05-2005, 04:56 PM
but that is were i disagree. how is the stng f4u-1 and p47D more deadly than a ki84. the ki is WAY faster than the p47 and a little faster f4u-1 and with the exeption of up high and in a LONG drawn out mid to shallow dive the stang. it turns WAY WAY better than the p47 and p51 and turns a good bit better than the f4u-1. it has big A cannons that can kill all of the above in even the luckyst of shots from tottal noobs from the frickn moon "tring to be funny". the only thing that the above has got going for them is high alt dives and thats not even by that much.

yes not geting shot is what you want BUT every one gets shot at and hit. so thats like telling a starveing man who cant find food that the point is to eat.

fordfan25
04-05-2005, 04:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
heheheh sneaky sneaky now ford hmmm?

im just happy i hijacked fords hellcat thread into a Ki84 / hellcat blend.

IJA / IJN infiltrators are everywhere... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes i noticed what you did lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Oilburner_TAW
04-05-2005, 04:57 PM
It's amazing with all the shoddy workmanship involved with the KI-84 they were able to get clean glass for the windshield http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

fordfan25
04-05-2005, 05:01 PM
posted Tue April 05 2005 16:46
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Badsight.:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by fordfan25:
and not the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ok says who ?

& based on what ?

& have you even bothered to test it ?"



ok i think i see were you got me wrong on that one badsight. you thought i was talking about the FM bing bs on the ki's . lol no i was talking about the vast fleet of them in srvers being BS lol. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif see i do try to make an effort to see it every ones way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

fordfan25
04-05-2005, 05:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oilburner_TAW:
It's amazing with all the shoddy workmanship involved with the KI-84 they were able to get clean glass for the windshield http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


LMAO. yea i know right i wish the US spy network coulda found out there secrits and aplied them to the hellcat lol.

Giganoni
04-05-2005, 07:09 PM
If you need glasses to see through the Hellcat's windshield, go ahead and get them. Anyway, there should not be any blaming Japanese tests for the high speed performance of the Ki84. If anything my Japanese sources are the most conservative for top speed of production aircraft. 624kph/6500m (which is still faster that the Hellcat according to my sources). My western sources on the Ki84 give 631kph. However, it is interesting that no plane in this game really comes with the historical baggage they carried with them in the war. There is no shoddy workmanship, no malaria ridden pilot, no sudden oil pressure loss, no jammed guns or failed drop tank release. No having to worry about front line planes being less reliable and having a worse performance than a fresh off the assembly line plane.

When I go online to fight a dogfight and I choose the Ki84 I'm not suddenly transported to 1944 and in the 200thSentai defending the Phillippines while worrying about fuel quality, reliablity and if my ground crew will live the next raid to keep my plane running. I have none of those fears. Its a game full of planes flying how they "should" have flown, not how they did. Exceeding 680kph was a Ki84s requirement for adoption by the Army and it does that in the game, because it is a pristine aircraft that does not suffer front line or production degration. I'm dogfighting 109-k4s and avoiding being shot to pieces by Yak3s..there is little history in this. Why should I be handicapped by Japan's war situation in 1944-45 when I'm playing an online dogfight that has nothing to do with it?

Treetop64
04-05-2005, 07:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blueknight1964:

...And for goodness sake fix the goo on the windscreen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That, my friend, is a large bone of contention among many of us...

Badsight.
04-05-2005, 11:53 PM
its a MYTH that american fuel boosted the hayate's top speed

the Hayate didnt need the late war av-gas to make 427 Mph

can the low speed BS please stop , its O-L-D

392 Mph isnt the fastest speed posted by a standard Hayate & captured Japanese airmen claimed 700Kmh as its top speed . Japanese factorys generally underclaimed on their fighters rang & speed for the pilots protection


In Gakken No.46 Ki-84, at page 90, it sats :
----------------------------------------------------------
Though other fighters were supplied with 'Koku 87 Kihatsuyu' (87 octane aircraft fuel), graded down from 'Koku 91 Kihatsuyu' (91 octane aircraft fuel), in the last years of the war, only Ki-84 units were specially
supplied with 'Koku 95 Kihatsuyu' (95 octane aircraft fuel) by the army command. You can see how much priority they had

also , NO PLANE ( as in NONE , no american , no german , no British , no italian ) is made to suffer with Production problems

why should the Hayate be the only one ?!?!?!

look at the Captured Hayates they had to test , they were in MINT condition , seriously , no plane in FB has to put up with as much BS bias as the Hayate , it was killa 110-proof . deal with it

its DM is insane tho , sure it was better than other Japanese planes , but so what , thats no reason it should hang together like a tank

easy to hurt , hard to bust apart , i mean wtf ?

Badsight.
04-06-2005, 12:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
what do you mean test it?. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>if you bothered to , you would see it hits its climb & speed JUST as the Object Viewer says , oh , except for the fact that it wont reach its top speed without overheating

so what part of "BS fantasy Ki's" were meaning ?

you aint going to get history in a quake room , your going to get FBquake

Badsight.
04-06-2005, 12:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
maby. i just remember every body and there mother going nuts every time there was a thread on the f4u-4 and p47 N. again im not going to go on a long search looking for quots from months ago but I remember.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>well if you are not going to re-read old threads then you should remember them better

the people complaining about the -4 Corsair & P-47M were the same kill-joy , no-fun history & nothing else tards that spouted against the bearcat & Go-229 & Shinden , to try & spin as its the extreme LW fans that were whining is just that

spin

EnGaurde
04-06-2005, 12:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> no plane in FB has to put up with as much BS bias as the Hayate <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

theres an ad on aussie tv, selling twist top bundaberg rum bottles premixed with dry and lime

two guys crack the top off one and sit down in the backyard, then after about a 5 second pause, a HUGE amount of water just dumps down from above and washes em both off their chairs. The Bundy Bear is seen flying off in a firefighting helo.

one looks to the other and says... "jeez that was fresh..."

i kinda felt that way when i read that line. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

aah just feel the freshness of accurate, piercingly clear objective observation.

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

Badsight.
04-06-2005, 12:19 AM
Bundaberg ginger Beer used to replicate a olrd recipe when i was young , now they have made it into a soft-drink

nothing used to hit your thirst like bundaberg , its still good stuff tho

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 12:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
what do you mean test it?. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>if you bothered to , you would see it hits its climb & speed JUST as the Object Viewer says , oh , except for the fact that it wont reach its top speed without overheating

so what part of "BS fantasy Ki's" were meaning ?

you aint going to get history in a quake room , your going to get FBquake <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>]\


for cryn out frickn loud Bsight if YOU would BOTHER to actully read my post and take the time to let it sink in you would know two pages ago i was not talking about the FM of the KI but the numbers in wich it is incounterd on frickn line good greef man. *bangs head on wall* *kicks the TV* i may have bad spelling but some people need to train up on reading comprehension . and i mean that in the nicest posable way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif lol. hear ill repost this for you

posted Tue April 05 2005 16:46
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Badsight.:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by fordfan25:
and not the BS fantasy 100,000 KI84's
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ok says who ?

& based on what ?

& have you even bothered to test it ?"



ok i think i see were you got me wrong on that one badsight. you thought i was talking about the FM bing bs on the ki's . lol no i was talking about the vast fleet of them in srvers being BS lol. see i do try to make an effort to see it every ones way

1c:"you want the -4". Fordfan:"I think I deserve the -4". 1c: "You cant handle the -4"

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 12:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
maby. i just remember every body and there mother going nuts every time there was a thread on the f4u-4 and p47 N. again im not going to go on a long search looking for quots from months ago but I remember.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>well if you are not going to re-read old threads then you should remember them better

the people complaining about the -4 Corsair & P-47M were the same kill-joy , no-fun history & nothing else tards that spouted against the bearcat & Go-229 & Shinden , to try & spin as its the extreme LW fans that were whining is just that

spin <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"well if you are not going to re-read old threads then you should remember them better"

lol heck you cant even remember what was wrought 1 page ago LMAO "im jokeing with ya. not trying to be mean http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif"

and

Badsight.
04-06-2005, 01:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
i was talking about the vast fleet of them in srvers being BS lol. see i do try to make an effort to see it every ones way" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>& what part of :
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>you aint going to get history in a quake room , your going to get FBquake <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>didnt i get across
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 1c:"you want the -4". Fordfan:"I think I deserve the -4". 1c: "You cant handle the -4" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>what i dont like is not having the Bar4

EnGaurde
04-06-2005, 02:44 AM
the **** over the windscreen of the hellcat...

could that be realism?

look at your own windscreen after driving for four hours.

is it lickably clean? DARE YA !

though i do see the point of not having smearing over the glass, surely all you top speed / FM / anything you can focus on inaccuracy obsessed freaks could pass it off as oil thrown from the engine, gunsmoke particles sticking to a wet windscreen, or just plain bugs.

from what ive read, and seen, aircraft get feeeelthy. Mebbe this one is.... its the workhorse, after all?

or is that yukky ikky realism completely unnecessary?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Badsight.
04-06-2005, 03:12 AM
well consider that our monitors already do a poor job of real life long distance vision , pixels are just too big

then think about : why just the Hellcat

ffs why make it like that in the first place , anyway its all moot as its getting changed

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-06-2005, 07:09 AM
It's really too bad that this decent thread had deteriorated into this bantering back and forth about he said/ she said BS...later.

Blueknight1964
04-06-2005, 11:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Giganoni:
If you need glasses to see through the Hellcat's windshield, go ahead and get them. Anyway, there should not be any blaming Japanese tests for the high speed performance of the Ki84. If anything my Japanese sources are the most conservative for top speed of production aircraft. 624kph/6500m (which is still faster that the Hellcat according to my sources). My western sources on the Ki84 give 631kph. However, it is interesting that no plane in this game really comes with the historical baggage they carried with them in the war. There is no shoddy workmanship, no malaria ridden pilot, no sudden oil pressure loss, no jammed guns or failed drop tank release. No having to worry about front line planes being less reliable and having a worse performance than a fresh off the assembly line plane.

When I go online to fight a dogfight and I choose the Ki84 I'm not suddenly transported to 1944 and in the 200thSentai defending the Phillippines while worrying about fuel quality, reliablity and if my ground crew will live the next raid to keep my plane running. I have none of those fears. Its a game full of planes flying how they "should" have flown, not how they did. Exceeding 680kph was a Ki84s requirement for adoption by the Army and it does that in the game, because it is a pristine aircraft that does not suffer front line or production degration. I'm dogfighting 109-k4s and avoiding being shot to pieces by Yak3s..there is little history in this. Why should I be handicapped by Japan's war situation in 1944-45 when I'm playing an online dogfight that has nothing to do with it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct Sir in that the KI 84 was modeled according to spec and would outrun the hellcat. Just wish all of the planes were modeled the same way.

As to the jammed guns, I suppose you meant prior to receiving any battle damage as I have seen the jammed guns many times...lol

OH and you dont need glasses to see through the windscreen of the hellcat. Just some 1C window cleaner would do nicely. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

This thread wasnt started as a plane comparison but merely a question as to what people thought of it, till it was hijacked.

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 12:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
the **** over the windscreen of the hellcat...

could that be realism?

look at your own windscreen after driving for four hours.

is it lickably clean? _DARE YA !_

though i do see the point of not having smearing over the glass, surely all you top speed / FM / anything you can focus on inaccuracy obsessed freaks could pass it off as oil thrown from the engine, gunsmoke particles sticking to a wet windscreen, or just plain bugs.

from what ive read, and seen, aircraft get feeeelthy. Mebbe this one is.... its the workhorse, after all?

or is that yukky ikky realism completely unnecessary?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i havnt wash my trucks windshield in 3 months and its still clear. if thay are going to add that kinda relism then it should be for all the planes and not just the one. it was a frag up plain as day.

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 12:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
well consider that our monitors already do a poor job of real life long distance vision , pixels are just too big

then think about : why just the Hellcat

ffs why make it like that in the first place , anyway its all moot as its getting changed <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


that i agree with BadSight.

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 01:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
i was talking about the vast fleet of them in srvers being BS lol. see i do try to make an effort to see it every ones way" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>& what part of :
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>you aint going to get history in a quake room , your going to get FBquake <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>didnt i get across
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 1c:"you want the -4". Fordfan:"I think I deserve the -4". 1c: "You cant handle the -4" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>what i dont like is _not_ having the Bar4 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



in my best DR Evil impression"You just dont get it do you Scott"

in the start of the argument you mistoke what i said as a complaint about the FM of the KI. that is not what i said or ment. i said that the numbers in wich you see them on line was BS. you just wont see that was what i was talking about . you have made up your mind that i was talking about the FM. like when you said "test it" then i said "what do you mean test it". now you added that line about

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>you aint going to get history in a quake room , your going to get FBquake <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>didnt i get across"

some wear in the middle of the argument. that does not change the FACT that you thought i was talking about the FM of the ki. wich is what iv been tring so hard to get across to you that i was NOT talking about. now you can try as hard as you want to change the argument into a new direction to draw attintion away from what started the argument all you want but im not going to fall into it.

now if you want to change the argument to why or why not things are fair in online srvers with lots of ki 84s or what ever,then i dont have a problem with that BUT lets strighten this out first.

I was NOT talking about the FM bing BS on any plane.

I do NOT want "a Zero in the shape of a F6F" .

now. if you understand that im not attacking you or the FM of the KI or any other plane please give me a nod or a ok ford i gotcha now. i am not going to get drawn into another argument that throws new things in and takes my past statements out of context like iv seen some others do.


and to be honst id rather just drop all this junk now and get back on topic.

EnGaurde
04-06-2005, 04:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> i havnt wash my trucks windshield in 3 months and its still clear <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

er... ford.... matchbox cars dont count.

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

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 04:30 PM
well see the trick is i drive a ford. and thay move so fast that dirt ect does not have time to get stuck on hehehe.

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 04:36 PM
man almost 80 post in this thread and akmost nothing said on topic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif i love it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Giganoni
04-06-2005, 04:52 PM
Alright, I can't say much for handling at low speed with the Hellcat, but according to Hardballs viewer both Hellcats are faster in the game than what my sources tell me the speed was for the F6F-5, but not by much. I tend to see the Hellcat as a fighter on the cusp between mid-war and late war. One of the reasons it was able to do so well in the PTO is that its main opponents were the A6M and the Ki-43. When the Ki84 and N1K1-J start to arrive in significant numbers the IJA/IJN has lost many experienced pilots to the South Pacific (not to mention any sort of numerical advantage). Online in a DF server its brave to pick a Hellcat when half is flying a spit, the other half is flying the Yak3. I just hope that Oleg gives this sim just a bit more life to see if modelers can finish up the N1k1 so we could see a George_vs_Hellcat server haha, and hope they don't fly spits instead like the wildcat one.

fordfan25
04-06-2005, 08:17 PM
yea the cat was was slow compaired to other late war and even some mid war fighters for sure. all sites iv found list its top speed between 370 to 390 mph just depending on which site you look at. but aginst its real life oponet it did not need to be a mustang or 109K. as the war went one i remember reading that it was already being replaced by corsairs and planes were to replace it with the bearcat wich was faster and more muneverble. i think thay had already in late 1944 or early 45 started to phase it out with the -1 and -4 corsairs if im not mistaken.