Energy Maneuverability

[vranac]

I was reading this thred also , and I can't belive what I saw here

Josf try one fight with Robo or Bliss 1 vs 1 on 109 and you will see what are they talkin about.

I can give you a track ( recordig ) fightin 4 spits alone and they didnt have a chance to catch me. Solid pilots russian guys most of them.

I saw a lot better pilots then myself in CloD, so it isn't a pilot thing.

109 is better plane in this sim if you are using it right!

[Ibis]

Ho my, just like the old days.
bring it on
now where is my pipe and slippers?
Sweety bring me a drink would you
tar.

[JG14_Josf]

Josf try one fight with Robo or Bliss 1 vs 1 on 109 and you will see what are they talkin about.

vranac,

Suppose I had and interest in hearing more ambiguous claims of nothing specific, if we are to go way off the topic of Energy Maneuverability, then I could carefully listen to these ambiguities, and I'd ask myself questions like "Why am I wasting my time with these people who speak in ambiguities?"

Now you offer more of the same?

What exactly do you think these people are telling you that you think I aught to know?

Are they telling me what is the percent advantage in Corner Speed one plane has coded into it over another plane?

How about me reporting the best effort I have so far in accurately identifying the 109 Corner Speed, and then someone, some expert, some person who does actually know it all, sets me straight on the actual in game Corner Speed of the 109, which is not 350 km/h, rather it is 336 km/h, when fuel load is at 25% and recorded at 4,000 meters, and this person says something along the lines of "Hey, I can show you, let's log onto the Server before your regular squad night tomorrow, and I can have you follow me in a Windup Turn and if you can match my Corner Speed then we both can record the event and we both can know that both our planes, from both our computers, fly the same 109 Corner Speed, and we can even send each other our own track files, and you can see, and I can see, and anyone else can see, that our pilots are at the same amount of grey out, and will that be an on Topic type of event or would you prefer to deal with dishonest people who may or may not show up, may or may not have some secret program cheat going, may or may not have any clue as to what this Topic is about, and may or may not be looking for argument for the sake of argument?

Then, suppose, we both trade off, me and this mythical person, where mythical person A, we can call him A if we want, is on-line in a Spitfire while I fly on-line with a 109, and now we test relative Corner Speeds with the same follow the leader Windup Turn Test, same track files, same exchange of track files, and then we can document which plane has the better Corner Speed coded in the game and we can do so unambiguously.

Now, this is a discussion, and I have no shortage of competent sim pilots to work with, I don't need more "experts" wasting my time with their own axes to grind. If this game lasts past Beta and our squad remains interested in it then my interests in quantifying Energy Maneuverability will inspire specific things done by me, with people in my squad, and I can thank you for the advice, but I can also ask you "What is the point?"

What do you think, without ambiguity, these people, who already prop themselves up as authorities over what I think in my own mind, will teach me EVER?

So far they have taught me to stop wasting my time dealing with them.

So now, please, tell me what, exactly, these other people are going to teach me, according to your understanding of what exactly I want to know, as if I have not yet stated exactly what I want to know more than once.

Such as:

Cornering Speed: "The lowest air speed at which a fighter can obtain the structural or aerodynamic limiting G force."

In the "dogfight" situation, this is the speed I'm trying to maintain in order to "out-turn" an adversary. It's also the speed above which I must excercise caution to prevent "Over-G" damage. Below this speed I must remain "Stall vigilant.

Is there a central location where the cornering speeds of CLoD aircraft can be found?

More than that, there is the matter of actually plotting the Accelerated Stall line, if possible, and then there are neat things to know like the relative advantages and disadvantages of unloaded (dive and zoom) rates of acceleration and deceleration, along the lines of an absolute value for each plane, say: The Maximum Peak Rate of Acceleration, and a known time from the level flight stall to 100 km/h above Corner Speed, and then a "which plane zooms higher from the same altitude and same starting speed?" type knowable and quantitative advantage, documented in meters one plane tops out above another plane, or number of plane lengths one plane can zoom higher than the other, recorded on a track files, or some other unambiguous measure that does not change with a word in English from "lots" to "some" and then to "mucho" dude - cause' I said so.

When our Squad gets busy with these things: we figure it out, but thanks, and please consider just cluing me in yourself, if you think there is something I want to know, other than the things I'm asking to know - precisely.

Level Acceleration Rate for the 109 at the peak rate of level Acceleration and the Airspeed at that peak, and compare that to the same known performance measure for the Spitfire?

Do you think I want to know what I ask to know or do you think that I want to know what you think I want to know?

I'm asking, because I don't assume to know what you are thinking. Do you think it is strange that I don't assume to know what you are thinking?

I am asking, rather than assuming that I know the answer concerning what you do or do not think.

[MiG-3U]

Well Josf,
1. If you want to test the planes then just do it with your team, find a method to do it, measure the results and publish here. Then we have something to talk about.

2. If you find that you/your team can't deal with the Spitfires when flying the 109s in this sim, try if you can deal with the 109s while you are flying the 109s as well (or Spit vs Spit). Then you know that if it's the plane or the pilot.

3. If you really think that you have a point, try to pack it to just few lines and to a well defined, specific argument or question. I simply can't find what should we exactly talk about from your longish posts.

4. Your every post contains many, many questions, often more or less rhetorical. And if someone at least partially tries to answer your questions, you reply with even more questions which are even more rhetorical if possible. In the end no one is interested to give answers because this is going nowhere.

[ATAG_Bliss]

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/i...1.70/wap2.html

I think this about sums it up

Unfortunately, some folk aren’t just wrong, they are wrong with conviction and persistence, and no amount of reason helps

[macro]

Originally Posted by vranac

I was reading this thred also , and I can't belive what I saw here

Josf try one fight with Robo or Bliss 1 vs 1 on 109 and you will see what are they talkin about.

I can give you a track ( recordig ) fightin 4 spits alone and they didnt have a chance to catch me. Solid pilots russian guys most of them.

I saw a lot better pilots then myself in CloD, so it isn't a pilot thing.

109 is better plane in this sim if you are using it right!

Anyone who plays the game would know this

[JG14_Josf]

Indeed. People now have an instant dislike to you, and that saves them a lot of time.......

As to Wotan and why his company is welcome: The person is honest and that is a quality that is honorable, it is a true person, someone that isn't found to be distrustful immediately, someone who is found to be worthy of trust over time.

As to people who religiously consider their viewpoints of my viewpoint more valid than my viewpoint: That is an obvious measure of dishonestly.

I am going to give the next comment some effort, despite an obvious case of misunderstanding:

1. If you want to test the planes then just do it with your team, find a method to do it, measure the results and publish here. Then we have something to talk about.

109 Corner Speed = 350 km/h fully loaded with fuel

2. If you find that you/your team can't deal with the Spitfires when flying the 109s in this sim, try if you can deal with the 109s while you are flying the 109s as well (or Spit vs Spit). Then you know that if it's the plane or the pilot.

We are having a lot of fun dealing with other pilots and oddly enough the guys who are flying the same planes as us are not shooting us down either. We manage well, but thanks for your honest concern for our well being?

Can you tell my why you think we need help?

How many times can I repeat the same thing, such as the fact that we as a Squad (when interested in a game that isn't being thrown out to pasture) figure out which planes are better, how, and how much, repeating that fact, over, and over, again, and yet the fact cannot be communicated to some people for some reason as if their willpower is being used to remain ignorant of that fact on purpose? Will you read this and then become aware of this fact that our Squad does find out which planes have higher Sustained Turn Performance, as we found out that the Spitfire does in this game, and we find out which planes are better at zoom climbs, we find that out, we do, so you can know that, if you care to know that fact, or you can pretend that you don't know that fact, or you can just type things on a forum without actually reading the Topic.

Whatever dude.

3. If you really think that you have a point, try to pack it to just few lines and to a well defined, specific argument or question. I simply can't find what should we exactly talk about from your longish posts.

Do you know the Spitfire Corner Speed? If not then consider finding a Topic you have an interest in and then you may figure out what you might want to say that is relevant to that topic, but I'm not you, so I don't know what you have an interest in, such that you might want to participate in the discussion on that actual Topic - whatever interests you.

4. Your every post contains many, many questions, often more or less rhetorical. And if someone at least partially tries to answer your questions, you reply with even more questions which are even more rhetorical if possible. In the end no one is interested to give answers because this is going nowhere.

What is the Spitfire Corner Speed?

The 109 Corner Speed is (by my own measure) 350 Km/h.

What method do you use to determine Corner Speed?

I use an extended Windup Turn to determine Corner Speed.

Do you see how things can get started if you have an interest in the topic, or would you prefer to continue telling me what I do as if I didn't know what I do?

Moving on:

Hello Josf, I ment asking the trivial questions in your initial posts. Some other user called them rhetorical. It means the answer was already known anyone familiar with this particular sim, when that question has been asked by you.

By "one sided" I ment they were coming from a person trying one particular plane.

I am sorry I got you confused, I hope it is clear now.

I may find something worth reading so I will continue in this interesting flow of information, but a trivial question to one person who does not share an interest in something is not a trivial question to me when I am endeavoring to share an interest in something. Can that be understood?

Can that be understood? <----another trivial question? <-------another trivial question?

Turn and burn the Topic Starter?

Diversions?

Off-Topic forms of censorship? If you can't actually answer the questions asked, resort to smoke and mirrors?

How about starting over, as if the first question asked in the first post was not clear, and therefore the fact that the first question in the first post failing to be clear is the reason why no one has yet offered a number for the Spitfire Corner Speed?

Did I miss someone actually offering a number for the Spitfire Corner Speed?

Did I miss someone actually offering a number for the 109 Corner Speed?

No, I did not miss an actual number for the 109 Corner Speed since I offered it - on Topic.

109 Corner Speed = 350 km/h (indicated, and fully loaded)

It means the answer was already known anyone familiar with this particular sim, when that question has been asked by you.

Hazarding more of the same turning and burning, like a merry go round, I can answer that question on the wild chance that the person asking the question is genuinely speaking about a specific question:

What is the Spitfire Corner Speed in the latest version of the game CLoD?

By "one sided" I ment they were coming from a person trying one particular plane.

My question has no side, my question has no alternator motive, it is a question, just a question, and there is an answer, and the answer has no side either.

Example:
Will the sun come up?

That is a question that has no side. It is a question. If the person has an interest in knowing the answer, then the person does not already know that answer, so the person, logically, will be asking the question seeking the answer to the question.

What is the Spitfire Corner Speed? (before moving on to other vital questions having to do with Energy Maneuverability)

I already know which plane has the Superior Sustained Turn Performance, which is easy to figure out, so I'm now wondering if someone were to arrive here asking that question, someone saying hey, you guys should know, which plane has a Superior Sustained Turn Performance in this game? - and the response is you don't know how to fly the 109.

Hmmmmm

The response is a turn fight?

Turning the person asking the question away from asking the question?

Targeting the person asking the question for asking the question?

By "one sided" I ment they were coming from a person trying one particular plane.

And what if I had not "tried" any plane, how does that make me one-sided as in:

What does "asking trivial questions from one side" mean?

If you have no interest, or merely a trivial interest, in my questions, which are not one sided, then why are you attacking me personally?

Your thoughts, assumptions, hypotheses as presented in your initial posts. If you decided to come in here to present your theories based on no experience with this particular sim, you can expected some of it to be wrong and therefore confronted by other forum users. I hope you do not mind, it is actually the point of starting a thread imho, e.g. having other people posting in a thread, leading a discussion.

This appears to be akin to beating a dead horse, and by the end of this present effort I will either find cause to read another of your posts or this will be the end of it.

If you refuse to identify something you claim to be one of my "theories" then there is no point in going around in this circle.

Which "theory" do you claim to be "wrong" and if you don't get back to the topic (if you can't stop attacking me personally instead of getting to the topic) in this LAST response, as far as I am concerned your "contributions" to this "discussion" will be terminated on my end.

I do not know your thoughts, I only know the ones you verbally presented in this thread and most of them were wrong, so I told you so. I spent considerable amount of time doing that. I understand you do not appreciate tha I disagree with you. I was not the only person telling you that. Perhaps that would be a good indication for you to reconsider your own thoughts.

For anyone out there who is capable of reading English, please consider that the above is a very good example of intellectual dishonestly all contained in one paragraph.

Note:

I do not know your thoughts,...

That is a statement of fact.

I understand you do not appreciate tha I disagree with you.

That is a contradiction to the previous statement of fact.

People who are intellectually dishonest are often authors of self confessed contradictions, and this is not NEWS for those who know better.

What is the point of invading a topic, and then producing deception as a means of "contributing" to the discussion that is no longer a discussion once the elements of deception infect that flow of information?

I am sorry you see it this way. It was my intention to participate in this thread because I find this topic very interesting. Unfortunately I found that the OP is not an authority on aerial combat in Cliffs of Dover yet.

Recap:

I ask other people if they can offer specific information so as to discuss the Topic of Energy Maneuverability relative to the game CLod. That is a published fact.

What is the Spitfire and 109 Corner Speed?

I found out the 109 Corner Speed.

109 Corner Speed = 350 km/h

How about the Spitfire?

Anyone?

No one?

So, without actually answering the question asked, what is the point of intellectual dishonesty instead, as if the question asked is trivial and Flame Wars are more exciting?

Did I miss a number next to the Spitfire somewhere in this thread?

109 = 350 km/h (indicated, full of fuel, some fuel burned to reach 6,000 meters, and then begin a Windup Turn through 4,000 meters, number taken at 4,000 meters)

Spitfire = ? (did I miss the answer?)

I was hoping for the oposite after I replied that you were wrong, unfortunatelly. I was hoping for an interesting debate on topic. I would not otherwise spend time typing my replies.

I can guess that there won't be anything on topic in this last reply and therefore this is the last reply I will read from you, so you may, or may not, stay in this Topic to do whatever dishonest thing you want, it is not only trivial to me, it is irrelevant to me and my interests.

(about Mk.Vb vs A-3) Say you are in a Spitfire, nose to nose merge co-alt, same speed, no wingmans.

Saving grace?

Now that is an interesting question and if I knew both the Spitfire and 190 Corner speeds I could answer the question with more authority, at least the authority of knowing which plane has the Superior Corner Speed.

The set-up is ideally suited for a Sustained Turn Technique where the concept of the maneuver involves a nose to tail turn after the merge, and if the Spitfire pilot intends to force a nose to nose turn (which is much more suited for a lower Corner Speed or superior Sustained Turn fighter) after the merge then watch for it, and reverse the turn on him.

Would you like to hear more or are you going to twist what I have to say on that subject into more self-confessed intellectual dishonesty, whereby you twists what I have to say into some "theory" that exists only in your mind, NOT MINE?

You would need a reason to moderate my contributions other than the fact I disagree with you.

I disagree with you when you publicly publish lies about me like this:

I understand you do not appreciate tha I disagree with you.

If you know of, instead of imagining, or willfully resorting to lies, any disagreements I have concerning what you offer, then say so, don't resort to obfuscation along with your fabrications of lies about me.

Would you moderate (I suppose that means remove) the contributions of other forum users that also disagree with you? That is quite a few people in here already and as you see and all of them are telling you cca. what I was telling you.

I have a forum myself. I have deleted many users as they try to use my forum for advertizements of Golf Equipment.

Someone like you would never be allowed on my forum after the second time (after one warning) you publish lies about another forum member such as this:

I understand you do not appreciate tha I disagree with you.

That is a lie. I know that is a lie because you confess the fact that you know better here:

I do not know your thoughts,...

You are a liar. You have one warning. Lie again and you will be moderated.

If it were a physical connection, not hiding behind anonymity, liars tend to get punched in the nose, and that can be twisted around by a liar, where the liar claims that I am threatening someone, which I am not, I have punched no one in the nose, ever, and I am not about to start, but the fact remains to be a fact, that liars who lie about other people to their faces, spreading vicious lies publicly, are apt, in real life, to pay the price for doing so, not here, but in reality this is true. I've seen it, and it does tend to discourage the willful lies which are so destructive to honest, interesting, discussion.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I've never seen an English speaking individual fail to understand the the most simple of English words. This is comedy gold.

But the real comedy does indeed come from visiting his own forums. There you can find years of him talking to himself. For a good laugh here you go: http://www.power-independence.com/forum/

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by JG14_Josf

You are a liar. You have one warning. Lie again and you will be moderated.

I want to see you moderate us. If not, by your own logic, you are a liar.

Originally Posted by JG14_Josf

If it were a physical connection, not hiding behind anonymity, liars tend to get punched in the nose, and that can be twisted around by a liar, where the liar claims that I am threatening someone, which I am not, I have punched no one in the nose, ever, and I am not about to start, but the fact remains to be a fact, that liars who lie about other people to their faces, spreading vicious lies publicly, are apt, in real life, to pay the price for doing so, not here, but in reality this is true. I've seen it, and it does tend to discourage the willful lies which are so destructive to honest, interesting, discussion.

If you read this back to yourself do you understand it?