SteveMartin wrote:
I was not overly happy to see the PK and FTE chits removed either as such events happened with alarming frequency. One need only recall that the Red Baron himself was the victim of a PK chit.
Anecdotal evidence is worse than useless as it does not provide facts while implying it does. Have you got historical statistics that can show your statement?
Its my opinion that too many people want to load the system in favour of the Germans.
It is not about giving Germans advantage, nor game balance, but about realism.
It might be glamourous to play with the German planes and be a part of that mystique so often applied to that side. But you should remember, you are playing the underdog, the dog that lost the war, so don't lament the fact that you are playing at a disadvantage.
You are brushing against Godwin's Law as you are implying that Germans are cooler to play due to a mystique on their fighting ability and ideology. This is not true.
Back to the original topic, I will reply here to another part of the thread:
SteveMartin wrote:
Well it was about sarcasm of course.
The problem with sarcasm is that it does not really counter the _merit_ of the opponent's argument.
Certainly an aircraft with a full tank of gas could perform as well as an aircraft with only half a tank and fuel considerations did NOT dictate maneuvers in a combat situation, but rather the willingness of a pilot to decide to fight.
Wrong. An a/c with a full tank is heavier than the same a/c with a half its tank. Therefore it will be more sluggish. Moreover, an a/c with no engine can manoeuvre as well as one with a working engine. It only has to trade altitude with speed. It is just about energy management.
Besides, fuel considerations are sound in modern air combat and to some extent to WWII combat. Nowadays we have engines that go through a tank load in mere minutes while under afterburners. This was not the case of WWI, as most rotary engines have one throttle setting (Full).
Most of the energy that was used during air combat came from altitude: manoeuvring reduces aircraft kinetic energy and its speed; as the engine had not enough power to cope with it, the pilot trades altitude for speed. As the a/cs manoeuvre to gain advantage, the fighters will gradually drop.
The maths is not simple, but it can be worked out. All you have to know is engine power and aerodynamic efficiency; you have also to assume an average G-load to figure out the performance need.
edit: of course, weight is quite important in the equation.
Because of their lower endurance, German aircraft rather consistently had to disengage before their Allied counterparts. Certainly any fighter pilot who had half a brain in his head (and wanted to keep them there) kept a close eye on his fuel supply, but once again, it was the German who had to pay even more attention to it.
I read a lot of "they had", but I see no evidence.
To ignore the reality of endurance (fuel boxes)
is to ignore the tactical reality of the situation.
And to ignore the reality of flight mechanics is to ignore the reality of air combat.
--
Calsir
--- Message edited by Calsir |
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
