IL-2 Russian Super Planes
Scott JD
compares...
There seems to be some minor flaws that do not lend to not buy the sim,
but are worth the subject..
it's the Russian plane FAVORTISUM, it's obvious the product is made by
Russians..
All the crap Early war Germans planes vs the LATe LATE LATE War Russian
ones... ooops ok ok, so Oleg left out just one, the Lavochkin La-7, the
LA5FN is just about as good, and the Yak-3 is about as fast and manuvers
and climbs better, all the ultra rare Yak-9 series... etc...
Were are the flyable FW190-D9's, BF109K's, with all this late war
ultra low war Production Yak-9Us and such, why not a Ta-152C.. Me-262's
are in the game but not flyable...
Another flaw is the 109 climb rate... jeez, not only are the VVS planes
FASTER, and turn better, but they also CLIMB better than any other plane
of WWII, I guess the russian had the Fastest (low alt), best climbing,
tightest turning planes combo's of WWII, seems if it's a British made
sim the Spitfires are KING, a American made sim, the P51D's..
I've heard all the crap from the Russian plane worshipers on here...
seems if those planes were so superior to the Germans or even
Americans/UK, then were did all the 200 plus kill pilots from Russia
hide, Germany had pilots who flew 109's that had 352 kills, 301 kills, a
Truckload worth of 200 plus kill pilots, tons of 100 plus kill pilots,
yet Russia's BEST of the BEST of the BEST yeilded 63-62 kills. and the
Germans had a VERY VERY strict kill prove result... Witnesses not around
and it didn't count, time not wrote down, place etc etc... no grounded
planes counted...Unlike the USA..
Maybe the Germans were a super-human race..... Come on please...
I play IL-2 on full flight model realality etc.. and when piloting a
109G6 LATE I have it full throddle and can't keep up with a Yak-3.. ok,
switch it around... I have to set the throddle of the Yak-3 to 2-3
(20-30%) to not run into the 109...
it was the Acceleration of the yak3, Yak9's that was so incredible, and
109's were some of the fastest accelerating planes of WWII..
Now please Russian plane worshipers tell me the Yak3-9's was so
powerful even at 20% power it could outfly a 109 at WEP ..
Heck the Yak3 and Yak9U seem like Mig15's..
Another proof of Favortisum... Fly a Il2... They outturn a 109, maybe
thats possable... but in the Sim I can Climb with any 109 in a Il-2,
and, were talking a HEAVY Armored (esp underbelly) plane .. if a B25 was
made in Russia would Oleg make it turn as tight as a Zero.. hummm!!, you
can pull back on the Il-2 stick, this plane will not stall, just try to
get it into a spin.. 109's in the game get into spins, and they had
Leading edge slats....
When Oleg does finnaly made the 190D9, Me262, 109K flyable, you know
damn well they are still noting going to match the La-7, Yak3 in not
just overall performance, but even low level speed... just because
something has the technoligy to be fast at high altitude, doesn't mean
it's a turtle at 200 fet, P51D would get over 400-410 MPH on the Deck as
well as some Spirefire 14's, 190D9's, Me262's were said to achive 500
MPH at 1000 meters (down from 540 at 13,000m)..
I've probably been on the extream side somewhat, but there is a slight
noticable obvyous Russian plane favor in flight model in this sim...
mainly in the Acceleration of speed in combat of the late war Yaks vs
any of the German planes.. and the Il-2's no (almost) stall/spin,
keeping up with 109G's in the climb..
I'm going to get a firestorm from the IL2 Worshipers, thats fine, .I
stand by the truth...
as well as I have many times defended the lack of Russian planes in
sims, I've always loved the Yak3 and La-7's, and have thought for
overall ballance of speed, climb, turning abilities, they was as good or
maybe better than the Spitfire 14's..
(But not this much)
The P51D (I'm American) to me is overrated...a Spit14
could outspeed, out-manuver, outclimb, outgun the P51D... all of them..
but all we hear is "the best of the best in WWII is the P51 Mustang"...
yeah for range, and overall ballance it was good, no were near best. I'm
patriotic, but not ignorant to truth...
and although I will admit IL-2 is my favorite flight sim,.. and do not
expect perfection..the Russian Uber-plane deal is noticable though.
Test for yourself, can anyplane in WWII at 20% (Yak3 or 9U) throddle
keep up with a (100% throddle) 109G, or could a tacticle Bomber (IL2
Sturmovik) really climb with a 109G6(LATE with Meth boost)..???
Scott
Steven Woo
When I'm in the Russian fighter in the first few missions of the
career mode, those German BF109's are running circles around me,
outclimb me and outrun me. I put it on auto pilot and they still run
circles around the computer pilot, but thankfully while they are
trying to shoot me down my wingman can take them out. I have full
realism for the flight model as well.
Also, this fact is totally irrelevant but those German pilots with
100's of kills shot down a lot of planes that weren't fighters if the
Guiness Book of Records is accurate. Doesn't 200 plus kills sound
outrageous on the face of it? Part of the reason the U.S. didn't get
a lot of pilots with high kills is that they forced most of those guys
to train other pilots. The Germans had the privilege of flying until
they died. Also, that super human race lost the war versus it's
supposed inferiors. It seems the tone of your message fits your email
address or you are just a big troll.
Steven Woo
your postings belittling any country's contribution to the fight of
WW2 against the Axis with the exception of the United States.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:59:29 -0500, Scott JD <kr...@abcs.com> wrote:
ZMike!
the German aircraft, planes like the FW190 and even 109 seem (to me)
to have much more potent firepower. If i'm flying an LA5, it flies
very well, but I have to really hose down my enemy with a lot of
rounds to do much damage. With an FW190, one pass/one burst is all it
takes, and the FW190 takes a lot of hits (too many IMO) to bring it
down. So I think IL2 still has reasonably fair gameplay overall,
German v. Russian.
IL2 is one of them most promising sims I've seen in ages, but (maybe
because I like it so much) I still think IL2 needs some adjustments,
such as: (not necessarily based on historical fact, but on my gameplay
preferences.)
AI aircraft appear to have "unfair" power & performance. Needs
adjustment.
Trim settings seem to affect maximum turning performance. Seems like
trim is a supplemental setting that should not affect ultimate control
authority or range.
Overall damage model needs adjusting, e.g. in real life I expect even
a single machine gun hit, or cannon hit, will do appreciable damage.
In IL2 as it currently exists, planes simply do not take enough damage
from the smaller weapons and/or a small number of hits. I'd like a
medium realism gunnery option somewhere in-between the current
"realistic" and "non-realistic" settings.
Needs a check-six view, as appropriate for aircraft type. This can be
an optional realism setting in conjunction with the no-cockpit view.
Some aircraft seem to snap into stalls/spins incredibly fast. I have
no real-life data but in most sims the transition is less violent. I
get more "stall kills" (opponent wipes out trying to evade me) than
legitimate kills in online play. Also, I swear planes fly better
(less twitchy, more forgiving) offline than online even when realism
settings are set the same.
Compared to say EAW, planes in IL2 take forever to pull out of a dive.
I dunno which is realistic but as far as gameplay the planes in EAW
seemed to tolerate looping & maneuvering in the vertical much better.
Better online scoring and reporting, e.g. "Player X killed Player Y."
Takeoffs & even taxiing/ground steering is a bitch. Have some mercy
on those of us with no rudder controls.
Better campaign structure, with branching or dynamic components.
Better detail control settings, so people with low-end PC systems can
completely turn off non-essential buildings, trees, prop animation,
etc.
Just a wish list, feel free to comment/add to it.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:59:29 -0500, Scott JD <kr...@abcs.com> wrote:
Bard
as for the high kills, it was mainly due to better pilot training and better
organisation that allowed the german aces to get those kills.
Bard
"Steven Woo" <swoo.please.remov...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:3c2ff372...@enews.newsguy.com...
me
A very interesting post.
My complaints fall in line mainly on the application of flight dynamics on
each of the model aircraft flown. I won't go as far as favoritism but
STRONGLY NOTE that the flight models really need to have more appropriate
data inserted into the program data-base.
Catseye
Scott JD <kr...@abcs.com> wrote in news:3C2FE2A1...@abcs.com:
> I like this sim alot, and think it's the best flight sim out, nothing
> compares...
>
> There seems to be some minor flaws that do not lend to not buy the sim,
> but are worth the subject..
> it's the Russian plane FAVORTISUM, it's obvious the product is made by
> Russians..
snip lots of good stuff . . . . .
Tom Cervo
>organisation that allowed the german aces to get those kills.
It was one or the other, but not both. "Better pilot training" would imply that
the aces were pulled out of front line service to impart their skills to new
pilots coming up in OTU's. They did not. Instead, by 1944 Luftwaffe units were
starting to look like "Dawn Patrol" squadrons--a few aces surrounded by
half-trained kids lost before their tenth mission.
"Better organization" was devoted to keeping the aces in the air, doing what
they did, rather than securing sir superiority. Chris Shores noticed this in
the Desert War. Some German ace would go off and pot two or three enemy planes
and come back a winner. Meantime the men on the ground caught hell from the two
or three planes that got through and accomplished the mission. I don't know if
the Luftwaffe ever noticed that their aces were so busy raising their scores
that they forgot to win the war.
Scott JD
me wrote:
> Scott,
> A very interesting post.
>
> My complaints fall in line mainly on the application of flight dynamics on
> each of the model aircraft flown. I won't go as far as favoritism but
> STRONGLY NOTE that the flight models really need to have more appropriate
> data inserted into the program data-base.
>
> Catseye
I do love this sim alot, my hats off the Oleg very much so, but I think he's
bveing slightly patriotic to his own nation as far as the flight models go..
no so much on the average, but with the Il2 climbing as good as a 109G6/AS, or
how a Yak9U at 20% throddle keeps up with a 109G6/AS in
acceleration/speed..and the lack of time period planes vs each other.. There
is no real late war 109G, the 109G's were all early/mid war planes, the True
late war German planes were the FW190D9's and Me262's, none of them in IL2
sim to fly... yet the Yak3 (arguably & probably the best Russian WWII fighter)
is there to fly, the Yak9U, etc no La-7 True, but most poeple will tell you
the Yak3 stood above the La-7 overall..
yet Luftwaffe drivers are forced to pilot Anceint underpowered crap.. The
Germans didn't have alot of late war stuff in combat in 1944.. the 109K &
190D9 was about it for props, Germans were concentrating on Jet
Technoligy..the ME-262 came out in the Summer of 1944.. no very manuverable, a
fuel hog, had to baby engine throddle to keep er going, but at 540 MPH nothing
on the planet at the time could catch it..4 massive 30mm's too.. the 262 was
not really made for fighter vs fighter combat, not manuveraable enough, and
the slow fire of the 30's didn't lend great for deflection shooting.. but as a
bomber intercepter..it was the best of the war.. it actually did well 1 vs 1
dogfights with other aircrafts... most of the 262's losses were taking off or
landing... (heck a Spad13 could kill a F15 this way)...
I would like to see Oleg let us fly em sometime, I just hope he doesn't
chop the performance up to make his countries aircraft stay superior..
scott
Scott JD
> Also, this fact is totally irrelevant but those German pilots with
> 100's of kills shot down a lot of planes that weren't fighters if the
> Guiness Book of Records is accurate. Doesn't 200 plus kills sound
> outrageous on the face of it?
so you plain deney any german got over 200 kills
> Part of the reason the U.S. didn't get
> a lot of pilots with high kills is that they forced most of those guys
> to train other pilots.
the tour of duty with US pilots was not as long yet, but American pilots
could also count kills on parked aircraft on ground.. a true kill of a plane,
but lame if you ask me..
> The Germans had the privilege of flying until
> they died.
So did the Russians, were are all there 300+ kill pilots? if there planes
were so superior, heck were is all the 200 plus kill pilots, were are any 100
plus kill pilots, Germany had 100's of them.. maybe some Russian pilots were
not trained well, but some of them should have got 900 kills (vs 200-300) if
there planes were so much faster, more manuverable and climbed better... the
109's had to have something going for them vs the VVS planes, I would think..
yet in the game IL2, Oleg had made EVERY aspect of the later VVS plane
superior to the Germans...
even REAL accounts of German pilots in WWII would tell you the 109 would
outclimb most all US and VVS planes...no matter what other disatvantage they
had... Not in the Game IL2 Sturmovik!!
> Also, that super human race lost the war versus it's
> supposed inferiors.
I was being sarcastic (spelling) mind you..... fiorget it, it's over your
head!
> It seems the tone of your message fits your email
> address or you are just a big troll.
>
Tone of my message is only truth, I love the sim overall, but I refuse to
sit here and lie to please the Russian plane worshipers...
if the flaws are brought to attention to Oleg by enough people, maybe he can
fix em, if all we do is get on here and say.. "it 100% perfect" he'll do
nothing...
Sooner of later someone will make a sim to defete this one for overall
flight model, and such.. there is a better standard to beat though, so it's
not going to be like it was.
you have a nuice day
scott
Richard Hockey
"Steven Woo" <swoo.please.remov...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:3c2ff372...@enews.newsguy.com...
>
> 100's of kills shot down a lot of planes that weren't fighters if the
> Guiness Book of Records is accurate.
Why should shooting down a glider full of enemy troops or a supply plane
mean any less than shooting down a one man fighter. Fighters don't mean a
great deal to the overall war effort, while shooting down bombers on their
way to strategic targets could have a significant effect.
>Doesn't 200 plus kills sound
> outrageous on the face of it? Part of the reason the U.S. didn't get
> a lot of pilots with high kills is that they forced most of those guys
> to train other pilots.
Thereby spreading the lessons learned by the US aces throughout the entire
US air force, improving the effectiveness of the entire force.
>The Germans had the privilege of flying until
> they died.
At which point the experience and skill they built up were lost to the
Luftwaffe, since the only people who had the opportunity to gain from their
experience were their wingmen (assuming they lived long enough to learn
anything).
Also, that super human race lost the war versus it's
> supposed inferiors.
The reasons stated above are a pretty good indicator of why the luftwaffe
lost, and the fact that the soviets could build and fly more planes than
germany. It was a game of numbers, and towards the end of the war the allies
were outproducing the germans, swamping them by numerical superiority.
Larry Lindstrom
>
> I like this sim alot, and think it's the best flight sim out, nothing
> compares...
I'm eager to get it next week.
I've been to a page, http://www.il2center.com/,
which talks about building planes for IL2.
Perhaps this is an answer to your concerns.
Larry
MK2
>Germany had pilots who flew 109's that had 352 kills, 301 kills, a
> Truckload worth of 200 plus kill pilots, tons of 100 plus kill pilots,
> yet Russia's BEST of the BEST of the BEST yeilded 63-62 kills.
The Germans achieving amazing results with approximately twenty 200+ kill
aces did so by constantly placing them in harms way throughout the war until
killed or the war ended.
The Russians use similar methods like the US did in WW2 . After a pilot
achieved a certain number of kills/sorties flown they were pulled out for
propaganda, instruction or just plain rest. If you were to take the sorties
flow by Koshedub (pardon the miss spelling of his name comrades:-) and
project them along with his 62 kills by the 1000 or so combats that Erich
Hartman saw, then you would get a similar kill score in the 300+ range.
German ace scores were the best but they got that way by constant exposure
to aerial warfare. They practiced a totally different method with their aces
than the Russians did.
Mk2
MK2
> the Spanish civil war, which Germany wisely used as a testing/training<
> Also, this fact is totally irrelevant but those German pilots with<
> 100's of kills shot down a lot of planes that weren't fighters if the<
> Guiness Book of Records is accurate. Doesn't 200 plus kills sound<
> outrageous on the face of it?<
Wow! I guess I'm the only ace historian in this thread.
Before anyone questions my credentials..I have read over 1000 books on the
subject and have studied aerial warfare and in particular aces of all
countries all wars for over 20 years. I have original combat reports signed
by some of the greatest aces in history...in other words I'm an authority on
the subject.
The German scores ARE REAL and most verified. The Germans DID NOT achieve a
large portion of their kills during the Spanish civil war. the top scorer in
the Spanish civil war for the Germans was Werner Molders with approximately
14 kills, (he ultimately scored over 100 and died in a plane crash ) All of
Erich Hartman's 352 kills are well documented, most were fighters in fact a
high nember of them were lagg's (this is an old tired subject dating back to
the 40's when the US air force could not believe the Germans achieved such
scoring results). If anyone has any questions concerning aces, no matter how
obscure please feel free to ask.
MK2
JD
-0500, as he held forth on "Re: IL-2 Russian Super Planes"
>If anyone has any questions concerning aces, no matter how
>obscure please feel free to ask.
Hmmm... well, OK. Where did "Sailor" Malan get his nickname?
No fair looking it up now <g>.
Regards, JD
jdk...@snet.net
MK2
That one was easy.....he was naval cadet :-)
I didn't mean " quiz me"....just any info anyone wants to know or wants me
to look up, I'll be more than happy to find the answer.
MK2
G Patricks
your date off by 1 day?
Icer
Joachim Trensz
thanks a lot for this interesting information!
Achim
"MK2" <m...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6XnY7.341837$er5.7...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
MK2
"G Patricks" <ice...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uc943uoopb2ba8l9c...@4ax.com...
MK2
"Joachim Trensz" <atr...@teleline.es> wrote in message
news:a0t8qj$mtfaj$1...@ID-99765.news.dfncis.de...
Joe Shaw
Well I certainly don't have the research to question your information but I
thought I read recently that Hartman's scores HAD been under some scrutiny? Any
information on that? I'd personally like to think that he did score 352 kills,
I'm tired of revisionist historians but ... the truth is important.
On a side note (and since you have the information) what's the latest and
greatest theory about Billy Bishop's kills in WW1? Specifically his famous VC
mission?
And ... sorry, you put the nickel in the jukebox you know ... any info on a
British/Israeli ace who went by "The Confectioner"? Apparently he got the name
from the British saying he picked up and kept using of "It's a piece of cake."
Thanks, this could be fun even if it is a hijacked thread :)
Joe
akicker
> I like this sim alot, and think it's the best flight sim out, nothing
>compares...
I agree 100%, its the best overall combat sim I've ever seen.
It raises the ante of what I call a top notch sim by several levels.
I love the replay feature and especially the ability to edit the
replays and watch them in slow motion even, seeing your own
handy work zoomed in and in slow motion is VERY cool!
I fight for the motherland one day and the jagdwaffe the next!
> I play IL-2 on full flight model realality etc.. and when piloting a
>109G6 LATE I have it full throddle and can't keep up with a Yak-3.. ok,
>switch it around... I have to set the throddle of the Yak-3 to 2-3
>(20-30%) to not run into the 109...
>it was the Acceleration of the yak3, Yak9's that was so incredible, and
>109's were some of the fastest accelerating planes of WWII..
> Now please Russian plane worshipers tell me the Yak3-9's was so
>powerful even at 20% power it could outfly a 109 at WEP ..
>
> Heck the Yak3 and Yak9U seem like Mig15's..
I havent flown the late war Russian aircraft yet, havent got around to
it, but if what you say is true that is ridiculous. I have flown the
the Lagg3, which appears to be a very good match for the 109F, and the
Mig 3, which is a total piece of shit and no match for a well flown
109F.
Is there someway in the game to select the campaign start date? I
havent been able to fly many of the Russian planes other than the 2
mentioned above, and Im itching to try out the P-39!
> Another proof of Favortisum... Fly a Il2... They outturn a 109, maybe
>thats possable... but in the Sim I can Climb with any 109 in a Il-2,
>and, were talking a HEAVY Armored (esp underbelly) plane .. if a B25 was
>made in Russia would Oleg make it turn as tight as a Zero.. hummm!!, you
>can pull back on the Il-2 stick, this plane will not stall, just try to
>get it into a spin.. 109's in the game get into spins, and they had
>Leading edge slats....
Well I have shot down the occaisional 109 in a lucky pass with the
IL2, but I have to say they definately do not turn or hang with the
109 in manuveuring. The 109 in the game is one sweet flying aeroplane
and the IL2 flys like it is heavy, and doing steep vertical manuvers
in the IL2 has got me into trouble several times, while the 109
handles vertical manuvers like a dream. As for climbing a IL2 versus a
109, I did a test within the game with the 109 and IL2 both loaded
with 50% fuel, no ordanace loaded. The 109 G-6 reached 1000m altitude
from dead stop in 1:23 with no WEP, and the single seat IL2 reached
the same altitude from dead stop in 2:18 with WEP engaged the whole
way. This would indicate that the IL2 cannot climb with the 109 in the
game.
Now there no doubt are issues with the autopilots having extra power
available and I have heard the planes fly differently online. I only
fly offline so I don't know about that but I definatley notice the
increase in power when autopilot is engaged.
I would like to see a few changes made in a future patch, like a
single key which can turn on/off the ID tags, and some means of a free
float view that can be driven around the game world like in EAW.
Hopefully a flyable German ground attack aircraft will be added like
the Stuka, HS-129 or even the Bf-110, which is unexplicably absent
from the game.
Anyway I would like to congratulate the producers of IL2 for making
something that will be the benchmark for all future sims, I'd love to
see more coming from them.
I intend to do some more intensive testing this weekend when my Abit
KG7 / AthlonXP 1.7 w/ 256 MB of DDR arrives!
later,
Akicker
Henri H. Arsenault
>> There seems to be some minor flaws that do not lend to not buy the sim,
>>but are worth the subject..
>> it's the Russian plane FAVORTISUM, it's obvious the product is made by
>>Russians..
>>All the crap Early war Germans planes vs the LATe LATE LATE War Russian
I'm not knowledgeable enough to judge whether or not the game is
unfair to German planes but....
The manual DOES state that the German planes were superior at medium
and high altitudes, and claims that they were inferior at low
altitudes, which is where the game is played.
Some (not all) of your objections relate to the fact that the planes
fly faster when controlled by the AI. Apparently the AI can keep WEP
on at all times without penalty. I also think that they get an extra
boost in speed. This may be due to the difficulty of keeping frame
rates up wyhile the AI is controlling dozens of planes, so the flight
models of AI-controlled planes may be over-simplified to keep frame
rates down.
Some of your comments about Russian-worshippers may or may not be
valid, but in my experience, there are a lot more German-worshippers
among gamers (I have been guilty of that myself on occasion).
On a different subject, I have a question: why the hell didn't planes
designed for strafing have their cannons slightly angled downwards so
that they didn't crash into the ground when strafing? My ratio of
dying from crashing into the ground vs being shot down is about 100:1.
At the easy levels, the game should compensate for the lack of 3D
perspective and lack of resolution by angling the gun slightly
downwards so that one could strafe while horizontal. I find it
impossible to recognize the object I am shooting at until I am right
on top of it (and about 1/10 of a second before I crash into the
ground)...
Fun game anyway.
Henri
Starshoy
>havent been able to fly many of the Russian planes other than the 2
>mentioned above, and Im itching to try out the P-39!
You have 3 ways to do it. First of all, you can simply play campaign
missions from FMB.
Second, you can edit campaign.ini file and remove several first missions
after [list] line. Better make a backup copy of campaign.ini, or even create
a new folder and copy all files there before that.
And, of course, you can create any career on any map and plane using IL2Gen.
http://www.il2center.com/Campaigns/
Currently there are scenario templates for Smolensk'41, Moscow'41, Rzhev,
Stalingrad, Kursk, Kuban and Smolensk'44.
Regards
Bard
"Joe Shaw" <js...@sisna.com> wrote in message
news:3C32A26E...@sisna.com...
being a load of bollocks ;)
Bard
Bard
"Richard Hockey" <rho...@elysian58.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a0rt43$5vj$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
how about the fact that switching production to fighters was seen as
"defeatist" after goerings boast that no enemy plane would fly over germany?
adolf galland's "the first and the last" explains the sheer stupidity from
the POV of the general of fighters of the luftwaffe.
Bard
Joe Shaw
> "Joe Shaw" <js...@sisna.com> wrote in message
<snip>
> > On a side note (and since you have the information) what's the latest and
> > greatest theory about Billy Bishop's kills in WW1? Specifically his famous
> > VC mission?
>
>
> being a load of bollocks ;)
>
> Bard
Well that's the question isn't it :) I saw part of a great documentary about it
once in which it was claimed that the whole thing was pure invention from the
get go. His armorer apparently claimed that far from his plane being shot to
splinters, as was reported in the press, it only had a few rounds in the wing
(IIRC) that frankly looked as if someone had deliberately fired a burst to make
it look good. In addition ... his Lewis gun was gone entirely, just as if
someone had wrenched it off to fire a burst and then tossed it. Not to mention
the fact that the Germans have zero record of any such attack or losses anywhere
near that date.
Now all of that is from my recollection so don't hold me to it. OTOH I found a
site on the web that attempted to justify all those points that is very
interesting. Obviously it's a "fan" site and has to be viewed with some care but
it is interesting.
http://www.billybishop.net/bishop.html
Basically I just wondered what the current thinking was.
Joe
JD
-0500, as he held forth on "Re: IL-2 Russian Super Planes"
>> Hmmm... well, OK. Where did "Sailor" Malan get his nickname?
I know... just pulling your leg.
Regards, JD
jdk...@snet.net
PS Actually he was in the Mercantile Marines. <g>
MK2
>>>thought I read recently that Hartman's scores HAD been under some
scrutiny?<<
Hartmann being the world's all time leading ace has had his record
scrutinized for over 50 years. He goes down in history scoring 352 . At this
point no matter what anyone comes up with 56 years later he scored what
history recorded he scored. Let me put it this way...if Hartmann's record
does not hold up, then no other aces record could possibly hold up either.
No other ace with the exception of Manfred himself (the Red Baron) has had
more study done on his kills.
>what's the latest and
> greatest theory about Billy Bishop's kills in WW1? Specifically his famous
VC
> mission?<
It just doesn't seemed to have happned the way he said it did. He went to
the grave defending it and now his relatives are doing the same. Bishop was
defintely a glorious ace but that mission was questioned by Josef Mai
himself (30 kill german ww1 ace )...he should know...he was there that day!
> any info on a
> British/Israeli ace who went by "The Confectioner"? Apparently he got the
name<
> from the British saying he picked up and kept using of "It's a piece of
cake."<
tough question as I do not know the story but I do know Israeli aces...What
time period did he fly in? the plane he flew could help me?
any of the following names strike a cord of familiarity? (the following
names are declassified and are part of historical record)
Spector 15 Kills
Nahumi 14 Kills
Snir 13.5 kills
Shalmon 13.5 kills
Richter 11.5 kills
Marom 11 Kills
Baharab 11 Kills
Karmi 9 Kills
Levin 9 Kills
Koren 9 Kills
Gonen 8 Kills
Egozi 8 Kills
Gill 7.5 Kills
Amir 7 Kills
Ronen 7 Kills
Kadar 7 Kills
hertz 6.5 Kills
Even -Nir 6 Kills
Agmon 6 Kills
Peled 5 Kills
Ariel Cohen 5 Kills
Rom 5 Kills
Ben-Ami Peri 5 Kills
Noiner 5 Kills
MK2
"Joe Shaw" <js...@sisna.com> wrote in message
news:3C32A26E...@sisna.com...
> Any
> information on that? I'd personally like to think that he did score 352
kills,
> I'm tired of revisionist historians but ... the truth is important.
>
> On a side note (and since you have the information) >
> And ... sorry, you put the nickel in the jukebox you know ...>
Joe Shaw
> OK lots of good questions here goes....
>
> >>>thought I read recently that Hartman's scores HAD been under some
> scrutiny?<<
>
> Hartmann being the world's all time leading ace has had his record
> scrutinized for over 50 years. He goes down in history scoring 352 . At this
> point no matter what anyone comes up with 56 years later he scored what
> history recorded he scored. Let me put it this way...if Hartmann's record
> does not hold up, then no other aces record could possibly hold up either.
> No other ace with the exception of Manfred himself (the Red Baron) has had
> more study done on his kills.
Good point, I'll see if I can dig up some sites that I can review. I certainly
don't have any reason to doubt his record but I vaugely recall seeing something.
> > what's the latest and
> > greatest theory about Billy Bishop's kills in WW1? Specifically his famous
> > VC mission?
>
> It just doesn't seemed to have happned the way he said it did. He went to
> the grave defending it and now his relatives are doing the same. Bishop was
> defintely a glorious ace but that mission was questioned by Josef Mai
> himself (30 kill german ww1 ace )...he should know...he was there that day!
No doubt at all that Bishop was a great ace, I don't think anyone can doubt that
regardless of the "truth" about his VC mission. His account does seem ...
strange in a lot of ways. Pity that his memory should be tarnished that way but
it is likely his fault.
> > any info on a British/Israeli ace who went by "The Confectioner"? Apparently
> he got > the name from the British saying he picked up and kept using of "It's
> a piece of
> > cake."
>
> tough question as I do not know the story but I do know Israeli aces...What
> time period did he fly in? the plane he flew could help me?
> any of the following names strike a cord of familiarity? (the following
> names are declassified and are part of historical record)
>
I was told that he flew in WW2 for the British (at least one instance had him
flying something unusual off a carrier, though I have the feeling that he wasn't
RN) and then later for the IAF. Beyond that I've nothing and none of the names
ring a bell either.
Thanks for the help, the subject of air aces is fascinating and they are a
fascinating breed.
Joe
MK2
a naval cadet :-)
"JD" <jdkbph...@snet.net> wrote in message
news:jn973u44dn03m64ec...@4ax.com...
Tom Cervo
>> the grave defending it and now his relatives are doing the same. Bishop was
>> defintely a glorious ace but that mission was questioned by Josef Mai
>> himself (30 kill german ww1 ace )...he should know...he was there that day!
>
>No doubt at all that Bishop was a great ace, I don't think anyone can doubt
>that
>regardless of the "truth" about his VC mission. His account does seem ...
>strange in a lot of ways. Pity that his memory should be tarnished that way
>but
>it is likely his fault.
>
The most recent study was in "Over The Front, Fall 1995. An aero historian,
Philip Markham, started out trying to prove that Bishop had done the thing, but
the deeper he dug the fewer facts he could find supporting it. As it now
stands, it's Bishop's word against everything else--including the opinions of
some of his own squadron mates. Keith "Grid" Caldwell, noted New Zealand ace
and a flight leader in Bishop's squadron refused to sign a postage issue
commemorating the attack, as did several other surviving members of the
squadron. Caldwell was very correct in stating only what he saw and leaving the
rest to reasonable surmise. privately he was sick of the whole thing.
Willie,Fry, Bishop's deputy flight leader, mentioned his doubts publicly and
got hauled over the coals for it by the Canadian media and the fanboy press. He
said nothing more and a friend released a letter of his after his death,
restating his original opinion.
That documentary you mentioned, "The Kid Who Couldn't Miss", is not very good
as history, inventing and confusing dates and witnesses.
There will always been some discrepancies between claims and records of
loss--most aero historians have agreed on an acceptable figure for reasonable
overclaiming due to the confusion of battle. But Bishop's raid is in a class by
itself, the first and only instance of a Victoria Cross awarded on the
recipient's own report and no other confirmation. It may be the reason that
only one VC was awarded to a fighter pilot in World War 2.
Marc de Vries
H. Arsenault) wrote:
>
>>> There seems to be some minor flaws that do not lend to not buy the sim,
>>>but are worth the subject..
>>> it's the Russian plane FAVORTISUM, it's obvious the product is made by
>>>Russians..
>>>All the crap Early war Germans planes vs the LATe LATE LATE War Russian
>
>I'm not knowledgeable enough to judge whether or not the game is
>unfair to German planes but....
>
>The manual DOES state that the German planes were superior at medium
>and high altitudes, and claims that they were inferior at low
>altitudes, which is where the game is played.
>
>Some (not all) of your objections relate to the fact that the planes
>fly faster when controlled by the AI. Apparently the AI can keep WEP
>on at all times without penalty.
This certainly seems to happen when you put your own plane on
autopilot. I can imagine that it also applies to other planes.
(Haven't been playing it enough to comment on that)
I guess the people that play IL2 in multiplayer mode should be able to
comment on the relative performance of the planes, if it really is
just an AI issue.
> I also think that they get an extra
>boost in speed. This may be due to the difficulty of keeping frame
>rates up wyhile the AI is controlling dozens of planes, so the flight
>models of AI-controlled planes may be over-simplified to keep frame
>rates down.
>
>Some of your comments about Russian-worshippers may or may not be
>valid, but in my experience, there are a lot more German-worshippers
>among gamers (I have been guilty of that myself on occasion).
>
>On a different subject, I have a question: why the hell didn't planes
>designed for strafing have their cannons slightly angled downwards so
>that they didn't crash into the ground when strafing?
I don't know about the russian planes, but I know something like that
has been done with the 40mm equiped hurricanes in Africa.
(Actually they were not angled downwards but just straight ahead.
Normally cannons and guns are angled slightly upwards. IIRC)
> My ratio of
>dying from crashing into the ground vs being shot down is about 100:1.
>At the easy levels, the game should compensate for the lack of 3D
>perspective and lack of resolution by angling the gun slightly
>downwards so that one could strafe while horizontal. I find it
>impossible to recognize the object I am shooting at until I am right
>on top of it (and about 1/10 of a second before I crash into the
>ground)...
>
>Fun game anyway.
That's the part many people seem to forget nowadays. I've seen lots of
flightsims that just were not fun to play.
Marc
prontomail
prontomail sucks
Amp King
>
> Before anyone questions my credentials..I have read over 1000 books on the
> subject and have studied aerial warfare and in particular aces of all
> countries all wars for over 20 years.
I love it..."in particular, all aces of all countries for all wars."
What a fucking boneheaded remark from a true egotist.
AMP KING
MK2
I have WW1 ace documents, autographs, books combat reports etc. etc. , WW2 ,
Korean, Vietnam, Israeli conflicts...even Gulf war correspondence with EACH
pilot who shot down a plane in the gulf war......why does that make me an
egoist?
It's my passion...what the hell does that have to do with Ego?
Geez...I'm sorry I did not realize your a 12 year old troll..........sorry
about the out burst.
MK2
"Amp King" <amp_...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7c047d7d.02011...@posting.google.com...
Joachim Trensz
please keep sharing your knowledge with us. I found it most interesting what
you had to say, and I also appreciate your giving your credentials - how
else could anyone know whether what you say must be taken serious or not.
Achim
"MK2" <m...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:o3K18.2149$Y17.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...