Well for one, both the I-153 and I-16, are known in real life for being fidgety about shots. But you can't plane the plane, as it's well known the problem with online and getting kills that don't count; which should. So it's not the I-153 or I-16s problem, that they get hit and can't fly anymore.

Second, I'm not saying your going to get an engine kill every time you BnZ the little bastards, but if your main focus while attacking one is the engine; your going to have a better chance depending on how the I-153 pilot is acting. If it's sim, it's more than likely he'll be flying in a straight line heading to the little furball up ahead.

whether it's the plane's fault or the game's fault, until the scoring is fixed, dogfight mode's mechanics is biased in favor of i-153. I'm sure the i-153 is a fine little biplane and served родина well, but if and until a patch fixes things, I still think it's a nuisance in bop dogfights.

I didn't say anything about speed, I said lift. The two things are not the same, although one is a function of the other. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you understand the physics of a wing, but your paragraph makes me think maybe not.

And I don't care about how it compares to other real world bi-planes. We're talking about the game, and specifically online battles.

Then you think wrong. As I've stated, dealing with them is a no-brainer. But all the counter-arguments in this thread seem to assume a one on one battle. That is no problem - I will eat them up and spit out the tail fin. My issue is with a big online dogfight, where the majority of people are in spits, 109s or whatever, and one or two guys will exploit the cheapness of the 153 (in this situation) to rack up kills.

Well, 153 pilots don't have the plane forced on them, so of course it's their fault they're flying one. And they fly one because they know they can get a lot of cheap kills, exactly because the majority of players will not implement counter-153 tactics and will instead just go about their usual turning battles.

I do ignore them for the most part and that is when they are a nuisance. The roll and turning advantage are exactly what makes them so cheap because of the nature of online battles.

I think the problem is you are coming at this from a real world view point, and I am coming at it purely from the view point of the game. Unless Erick Hartmann plays on a console with a controller, I don't care about him.

And please stop being so patronising.

Actually.. both turn radius and rate of turn have nothing to do with lift, but a lot with speed.
Low speed = Low turn radius, and high rate of turn. The extra lift provided by the bi-wings only means it can maintain a way lower airspeed, thus a lower turn radius and high rate of turn.

I'm sorry, but that's not true. How well can you turn when your elevators have been shot out?

Lift is only lift when you are flying with level wing tips. As soon as you roll your plane onto it's side, that lift then becomes turn. Which is why you lose altitude if your wings are exactly perpendicular to the ground.

Lift and turn are relative to the ground, not the plane. But the force resulting from the shape of the wing is relative to the orientation of the plane. So as you change the plane's orientation, you alter the effect of the wing relative to the Earth. What you say would be true if you use the rudder to turn. But you don't. You roll the plane onto it's side then use the elevator to turn.

Again, I'm not going to go into the physics of a wing because you can google it if you don't already know, but the upward force on a wing (i.e. lift on a level plane) is a function of it's forward speed (and curvature of the top surface).

...and angle of attack... ;)

The top and bottom of this is an 153 in a team battle match is like playing a game of football and someones dog runs on the pitch biting the ball. Its anoying as f**k
Yeah you can continue playing and try to ignore it but sooner or later you will get an urge to kick it into next week

ok the amount you can turn a plane depends on how much pressure is being generated by the elivators the more pressure they create without stalling the tighter the turn

PMSL awesome...

I could have saved myself a metric-fk tonne of typing if it had occured to me to sum it up so eloquently and succinctly. WP :) Don't forget that the dog will also probably end up scoring the most goals too lol.


EDIT: probably a good job we moved this out of shadowcorp's thread eh? Else he'd be having kittens :D

I'm not trying to patronize you, just telling you that your complaining about a plane which in REAL LIFE had this advantage over all other planes of the time, and I think that since it's the ONLY advantage this plane has, it's fine they exploit it. If they're dumb, then they're going to chase you but learn pretty quickly that they can't. And also, they had weaker guns than the other planes so their damage isn't as great because of the increased armor on the later planes. I mean do you really think, that fighter pilots back in WW2 actually didn't use their planes advantages over their opponent? That's just what you have to do with the I-153 and going against it.

Now, Seraph is correct. If you are going at 230mph in some plane, and you try and turn with a plane which is just going 150mph. Then the plane going 150mph is going to have the turning advantage because of it's slower speed. This doesn't just have to do with the I-153, but the I-16 as well. Try it sometime, fly against a I-16 and fly something like a Spitfire both planes must be at 100% throttle. Then you'll see which plane out turns the other. Turning radius has NOTHING to do with lift. Speed does because you need a certain amount of speed going over the wings (ie the amount of air being brought a crossed) so your plane doesn't stall and drop out of the air into some spin. The reason the I-153 has a better chance of staying in the air is because of its amount of wings; and the little air needed to actually keep it in the air unlike mono-planes which only have two wings, and stall much more than any biplane would.