I have no interest in obeying the orders of trolls. Why would I?

My interest is in helping people find out, for themselves, which plane is better.

If you do not have any interest in that, then why bother replying to my posts?

Someone who does have an interest as I have, as we share the interest, may be someone, who knows, I don't, someone who reads my post, then says, hey, that sounds like a good idea, how about setting a time and a day, and we make a track file of a few of those tests you keep repeating.

What tests?

You know those tests that you keep repeating.

Oh?

These:

1.
Side by side Spitfire and 109, online, with a replay recording to record the test. 2 or more pilots switch planes during subsequent tests to test repeatability of the tests and to make the pilot variable into a controlled constant instead of a variable.

a.
Level acceleration to see which plane can get away from, or catch, the other plane in level acceleration.

b.
Unloaded dive (minimum induced drag) and zoom to see which plane can get away from, or catch, the other plane in vertical dives and zooms where induced drag is minimized.

c.
Sustained turns in level flight to see which plane can turn inside the other plane in level flight where altitude loss is not a factor.

d.
Corner Speed tests, where one plane starts a diving spiral turn to maintain the smallest turn radius and maintain the fastest turn rate possible while maintaining the most altitude compared to the other plane.

Since I have my interests and you have your interests and those interests are not the same, the obvious result of that, it seems to me, is that you have no business speaking to me, and I have no business speaking to you, unless by doing so, there is in that effort, a sharing of interests.

Such as:

Having those track files made that way, those tests in those track files could, conceivably, contain enough information to plot out those plots that are required to make one of the Energy Maneuverability Charts, if not precisely, at least relatively accurate, as one plane would be conclusively better than another plane, in specific performance proven during the tests.

But what would be the need for a Chart if the Track File proves exactly what my interest is, in fact?

Which plane accelerates faster in level flight and by how much - exactly?

Which plane can dive faster and zoom higher in vertical maneuvering and by how much - exactly?

Which plane can sustain altitude in level flight and turn inside the other plane?

Which plane has the lower corner speed and at that lower corner speed which plane dumps more energy and by how much does one plane dump more energy at corner speed - exactly?

At corner speed, which plane has the absolute tightest turn radius and the absolute fastest turn rate, and by how much is the inferior plane inferior in absolute turn radius and turn rate?

So, again, those are my interests, as I see them, and while I do enjoy the game very much, while friends of mine share the game on-line, our work is more along the lines of teamwork.

last night, for example, we managed an effective half split, and it was very much a good investment of my time and energy, TO ME.

Perhaps not to you, but why would you think that your interests have anything to do with me?

LOL. When is a question an order?

What is funny?

There are people on this forum who publish words that appear to suggest that their viewpoint of what I should or should not do with my time is somehow authoritative.

Do you understand what I am saying, or do you laugh more at what I am saying?

When I make an Energy Maneuverability chart is your question.

My answer is to say that I have no interest in your question, and your question sounds a lot like the trolls on this forum as they publish replies that appear to suggest that I am somehow supposed to do what they say I should do, as if they have this magical power to order me around, making me abide by their sense of some nebulous authority over my interests, my time, my energy, or my goals.

When I make an Energy Maneuverability chart may be never, or it may be as soon as someone else decides that it is worth doing too.

So..LOL, if that is what you are doing, your question is not an order, and therefore a question, in this case, as far as I know, isn't an order, so, LOL, why do you ask that question?

Had someone with a common interest in finding out which plane is better answered any of my posts, they might have suggested doing so, themselves, or they might have just done so, finding someone they know, and then setting a time, and a day, to begin testing.

1.
Side by side level flight acceleration tests. Which one is superior and by how much, right there in the game, right in front of each player deciding to do so, without bothering another minute with trolls on forums.

2.
Side by side unloaded dive and zoom tests. Same process, same accurate results, same concept of not having to listen to any more fabrications of nonsense on a forum.

3.
Side by side Sustained turn tests in level flight, and everyone already knows which plane is superior, but by how much one is superior may be enlightening, and again, no more validity concerning forum talk.

4.
Side by Side diving spiral Corner Speed tests, which will turn out to be one plane either handily turning inside the other, and one plane easily maintaining more altitude (burning less energy at Corner Speed) or both will be the same, or the differences will be insignificant. No need to ask any forum person why he might think that the 109 is a perfect energy fighter.

If no one wants to do that, lacking interest, then I can do that in my own time, in my own way, and of what interest is it to me to take the trouble to document the facts I find the way I find them here?

So that I can be laughed at in public?

People I know know how to contact me if they care to discuss things with me, or share the latest, and best, World War II combat flight sim.

People who troll forums, leave their mark.

I am sure the Hurricane Mk I is the most common RAF fighter encountered in the game and the workhorse of Cliffs of Dover as in reality.

Yes it is actually - http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=35351

All this depends on the mission creators as you know.

The tests you said were easy to do, i.e.

and

You claim these tests are easy to do..

So it is safe to assume that you have done them..

Yet you refuse to post your data from these test let alone your analysis of these tests..

Thus all you do do is contine to post your 'opinions' of how the Spit and 109 are or are not simulated correctly.

The very thing you condem others of doing!

Providing basless opinions!

Odd to say the least that you would think no one would notice that

Your making it harder than it needs to be..

You don't need two people online.. All you need is one person offline making use of one of the many C# script files to log your data during your test. In essance the C# script file is anagolas to an instruemted aircraft (see sig) that collects all the pertanat data you will need for analysis post test. And it also provides the ability to display a HUD that can focus on any instrument values you desire. For example in a dive test you can have the pitch value displayed such that you don't have to try and read the guage during flight. This data collection is a must if you wish to ploat the Ps curves from a level acceleration test.

Here is a link to one of the C# script examples

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=27552

If you need any help feel free to PM me.

Cool.

Right

link...