![]() |
|
FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
What about the M S book having the same source of "Spitfire at war" => AAIB? Now if the AAIB data is not usefull to understand the real rate of structural damage, since it ignores the accident over the sea and in enemy territory, what is the meaning to post it? The real numbers are different, period, since we don't know how many poor guys died for overstressed airframe and they were filed as KIA because of the enemy. 3 books: one has different numbers... Which ones are the corrected numbers? Look I've "produced" a question about that data... Quote:
Or if Mr.Newton said "We had to investigate every accident during the war" it would be enough. But it does not say it... so sorry if I've some silly doubt. Quote:
In enemy territory, in combat, numbers can easily be different. Are numbers about accidents because of clouds really important when they did fight at 5km??? Does the pilot need to land in the fog in enemy territory? So lets stick to the data about stick forces, oversensivity, AoA e structural limits and lets try to analyse them together. Without the necessity to bring on numbers and reports who do not help. Mainly because THEY DID NOT FLY AS WE DO IN THE SIM.
__________________
![]() A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria. Last edited by 6S.Manu; 08-03-2012 at 03:34 PM. |
|
|