PDA

View Full Version : The Lerche AKA. What was Oleg thinking(smoking)



MEGILE
10-29-2007, 03:40 PM
This plane is humorous - ie. a joke.

Takes off vertically, carries X4 roskets, and is faster than Jets.. What the hell is that about? Oleg you nice?

Even Ironworks, Yorgo and that matt48578457092 dude can F6 ace in this thing.

Spit 85% throttle, no overheat? Gimme a break!

Please, ban the flying ButtPlug from all server planesets, so I can enjoy 46 without these flights of fantasy.

MEGILE
10-29-2007, 03:40 PM
This plane is humorous - ie. a joke.

Takes off vertically, carries X4 roskets, and is faster than Jets.. What the hell is that about? Oleg you nice?

Even Ironworks, Yorgo and that matt48578457092 dude can F6 ace in this thing.

Spit 85% throttle, no overheat? Gimme a break!

Please, ban the flying ButtPlug from all server planesets, so I can enjoy 46 without these flights of fantasy.

Daiichidoku
10-29-2007, 03:43 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
10-29-2007, 03:44 PM
He was paid off by the secret Heinkel lobby group that were upset that the vastly superior He-111 wasn't properly represented in any of the versions of the game so far (everyone knows it won the battle of Britain by out turning Hurricanes and blasting Spitfires with 100mm cannons).

F0_Dark_P
10-29-2007, 04:01 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v238/Nahoj/olegpimp.jpg

Oleg!

FluffyDucks2
10-29-2007, 04:39 PM
Farck!! I just sprayed my monitor with burgundy... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Oleg looks sweet http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

DKoor
10-29-2007, 04:41 PM
http://i24.tinypic.com/2d0mdlz.jpg

........few seconds later

BlitzPig_DDT
10-29-2007, 04:44 PM
The Lerche ROCKS if for NO other reason than the original post in this thread.

Anti-fun, plane hating sim commies suck.

BTW, the Lerche only had slight modifications done to make it work. Nothing that could not conceivably have been done at the time, EXCEPT for MAYBE the amount of power it has. And in actuallity, that's where they messed up. They went overboard on adding power to it. Last time I checked it'll go vert from 0m to 8Km before it starts to fall (ignoring overheat). It doesn't need THAT much power to work. lol

'46 is the best thing to ever happen to this sim. The weirder the planes the better. We need more of them.

LEBillfish
10-29-2007, 05:06 PM
I LOVE early war stuff.....and the 1946 plane set collection is AWESOME. Probably more then any other release showed me aircraft and the like I knew nothing about much of it transition work......

What I don't like are POOR troll attempts to simply add to post count...If you're going to troll then do it right, make it humorous, and make it worth buying into....NOT just some lame attempt to publically use a name you found cute after you looked in your toybox.

put your lerche back where you found it and work on your material http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Divine-Wind
10-29-2007, 05:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
the flying ButtPlug </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

mortoma
10-29-2007, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The Lerche ROCKS if for NO other reason than the original post in this thread.

Anti-fun, plane hating sim commies suck.

BTW, the Lerche only had slight modifications done to make it work. Nothing that could not conceivably have been done at the time, EXCEPT for MAYBE the amount of power it has. And in actuallity, that's where they messed up. They went overboard on adding power to it. Last time I checked it'll go vert from 0m to 8Km before it starts to fall (ignoring overheat). It doesn't need THAT much power to work. lol

'46 is the best thing to ever happen to this sim. The weirder the planes the better. We need more of them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You are so sarcastic!! Ha ha, at least I hope so. For one thing it could not have been done. The US tried similar planes in the following years but they were impractical and too hard for pilots to learn in a decent amount of time. Just for that reason alone they ( upright facing VTOLs ) were not worth it or cost effective. Would have been a possibility had Germany developed computer controlled systems, like fly-by-wire, to make it easier to learn, more stable during landing and takeoff. And especially the transitions in between and of course safer to operate. But no such technology existed at the time. This was nothing more than a napkin drawn fantasy in WWII.

Plus, as someone mentioned in another thread, if you experience an engine out in something like that you are in big trouble. No way to even deadstick it in for even a crash landing you'd live through.

mortoma
10-29-2007, 05:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
I LOVE early war stuff.....and the 1946 plane set collection is AWESOME. Probably more then any other release showed me aircraft and the like I knew nothing about much of it transition work......

What I don't like are POOR troll attempts to simply add to post count...If you're going to troll then do it right, make it humorous, and make it worth buying into....NOT just some lame attempt to publically use a name you found cute after you looked in your toybox.

put your lerche back where you found it and work on your material http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>???? Hmmmmmm, at least his post made some sense.

BlitzPig_DDT
10-29-2007, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The Lerche ROCKS if for NO other reason than the original post in this thread.

Anti-fun, plane hating sim commies suck.

BTW, the Lerche only had slight modifications done to make it work. Nothing that could not conceivably have been done at the time, EXCEPT for MAYBE the amount of power it has. And in actuallity, that's where they messed up. They went overboard on adding power to it. Last time I checked it'll go vert from 0m to 8Km before it starts to fall (ignoring overheat). It doesn't need THAT much power to work. lol

'46 is the best thing to ever happen to this sim. The weirder the planes the better. We need more of them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You are so sarcastic!! Ha ha, at least I hope so. For one thing it could not have been done. The US tried similar planes in the following years that they were impractical and too hard for pilots to learn in a decent amount of time. Just for that reason alone they ( upright facing VTOLs ) were not worth it or cost effective. Would have been a possibility had Germany developed computer controlled systems, like fly-by-wire, to make it easier to learn, more stable during landing and takeoff. And especially the transitions in between and of course safer to operate. But no such technology existed at the time. This was nothing more than a napkin drawn fantasy in WWII. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope.

People would assume the complexity of the Kommandogeraet to be impossible back then. MOST people think a flying wing is IMPOSSIBLE without computers.

They is wrong, be sure.

Ditto here. I'm talking about the technology available, not the knowledge. In otherwords, I could go back then and help improve engine power. Any modern (hardcore) gear head could. Even more so if you go back to WWI. But.... the thing is, it's strictly speaking within the limits of the technology of the day.

You're confusing the 2 in the midst of your plane hating. I hadn't assumed you to be a sim-commie... are you saying you are?

(definition of a sim-commie is anyone who wants everyone to use the planes that THEY like, and not have ANY freedom of choice. Many would prefer to use the term nazi instead, but since it's all about being the same, and since commies were truly MORE evil, sim-commie is a more appropriate and less used term. Anyone who kvetches about cool and unusual planes because they want more of the same tired boring **** that we already have would qualify)

That's all Oleg did, apply modern knowledge to old tech. Where he fudged it was the amount of power, and the thumb on the scale was a little too heavy there.

mortoma
10-29-2007, 05:31 PM
Take a chill pill dude. Nowhere did I suggest any planeset should be reduced to whichever planes I prefer. And you are acting like some politically correct thought police person that seemingly infers people have no right do discuss their preferences and talk about which planes they like or dislike. I can post on my sentiments for or against any plane if I so chose and so can Megile!!

And if you don't like it, don't post in this thread. Take your stuffy attitude somewhere else and get on a good laxative. We are free to discuss things pertinent to the sim, pro or con.

If anything, your attitude reflects the type of restrictions on thought and freedom of expression a communist would admire. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!! And I can tell you're probably not from the US.

BfHeFwMe
10-29-2007, 06:02 PM
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q150/Biffy_06/lurch.jpg
He's not amused being being abused. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Jutocsa
10-29-2007, 06:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
And I can tell you're probably not from the US. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And is that wrong or what ?

waffen-79
10-29-2007, 06:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
http://i24.tinypic.com/2d0mdlz.jpg

........few seconds later </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heck!, for her I would model teH Spitfire Mk XIV, whirlwind and the P-80 if she ask for it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

damn! it sure pays up being a game developer, BE SURE!

waffen-79
10-29-2007, 06:15 PM
I think the fault about the Lerche relies on Luthier(sp)

Besides, that thing is rarely seen online and it compansates with the lack of fuel capacity

Dagnabit
10-29-2007, 06:30 PM
As a recent traitor to the red side, I must protest any attempted removal of the FBP.
The superiority of der axis AC in game is accurate portrayal of history.
I FEEL that der FBP is porked. And I can prove this, I give you three reasons.
1. Can FBP out climb Saturn rocket.....No!
2. Can FBP outrun X-15.................No!
3. Can FBP land safely.................No!
3. Can FBP dance like Fred Astaire.....No!
So you see why i FEEL this AC is not so uber as some suspect.
Once I find how to use FMB I will make a mission track, demonstrating the inferior FM of the FBP, I will will call it, The Inferior FM of the FBP.
Look for it in spring of 2008, on U-Tube.
Also for the immersion I am working on my German accent, and learning the language so that I can learn to say things like Achtung, dumbkoff, schwinehundt, with some authority...And my daughter taught me to say
"Ich habe gerechte Scheiße meine Hosen", I have no idea what it means yet but it sure sounds uber cool. So,Ich habe gerechte Scheiße meine Hosen, to all. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif
More later
Dag

BlitzPig_DDT
10-29-2007, 06:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
Take a chill pill dude. Nowhere did I suggest any planeset should be reduced to whichever planes I prefer. And you are acting like some politically correct thought police person that seemingly infers people have no right do discuss their preferences and talk about which planes they like or dislike. I can post on my sentiments for or against any plane if I so chose and so can Megile!!

And if you don't like it, don't post in this thread. Take your stuffy attitude somewhere else and get on a good laxative. We are free to discuss things pertinent to the sim, pro or con.

If anything, your attitude reflects the type of restrictions on thought and freedom of expression a communist would admire. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!! And I can tell you're probably not from the US. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Wrong on all accounts.

This places breeds a hair trigger though, and that's why I ASKED if you were, and didn't outright accuse you of it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If you are cool with all the interesting, weird, not normally made into sim, stuff, then we can raise a glass. http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/beerchug.gif

But yeah, people do jump to incorrect conclusions about the physical tech (and capabilities) of those times. Bringing in a little modern knowledge and things could really have been wild. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And I still maintain that in addition to it's inherent weirdness (aka coolness), it's other best feature is the fact that it really gets under so many people's skins. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

True, even making it work aside, there are the issues of what wind would do (we really don't have much of that here), and what happens when damaged. But then again, they rode highly combustable rockets powered by fuel that would eat the pilot, and were taking a page out of Japan's "Divine Wind" book near the end too, so.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

leitmotiv
10-29-2007, 06:34 PM
That's right---Lurch---but I prefer the Flying Buttplug. Tried it once. I thought of what Harrison Ford said after being dragged behind a car in a film stunt: "Another meaningless experience." The fantasy mix in 46 is less interesting to me than CRIMSON SKIES with war zeps and fantasy '30's airplanes. I'd rather have had AKRON and MACON, the zep aircraft carriers, an XB-15, and Airacudas. At least all of them really flew.

cawimmer430
10-29-2007, 06:42 PM
When I first flew the Lerche for the first time, I set up a QMB against B-29's at about 5,000 meters. Launched all my rockets and then couldn't wait to use the MK-103 / MK-108 cannons. Well, I did...and they were out of ammo after something like a 2-3 second burst. Darn it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

DKoor
10-29-2007, 06:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
That's right---Lurch---but I prefer the Flying Buttplug. Tried it once. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>QFT

Daiichidoku
10-29-2007, 07:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
That's right---Lurch---but I prefer the Flying Buttplug. Tried it once. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>QFT </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2007, 07:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
This plane is humorous - ie. a joke.

Takes off vertically, carries X4 roskets, and is faster than Jets.. What the hell is that about? Oleg you nice?

Even Ironworks, Yorgo and that matt48578457092 dude can F6 ace in this thing.

Spit 85% throttle, no overheat? Gimme a break!

Please, ban the flying ButtPlug from all server planesets, so I can enjoy 46 without these flights of fantasy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Welcome to last year http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

HuninMunin
10-29-2007, 07:12 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Cajun76
10-29-2007, 07:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by cawimmer430:
When I first flew the Lerche for the first time, I set up a QMB against B-29's at about 5,000 meters. Launched all my rockets and then couldn't wait to use the MK-103 / MK-108 cannons. Well, I did...and they were out of ammo after something like a 2-3 second burst. Darn it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

200rpg vs 20rpg with missiles IIRC.

Tator_Totts
10-29-2007, 07:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:

What I don't like are POOR troll attempts to simply add to post count...If you're going to troll then do it right, make it humorous, and make it worth buying into....NOT just some lame attempt to publically use a name you found cute after you looked in your toybox. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I thought this was funny.

Please, ban the flying ButtPlug from all server planesets, so I can enjoy 46 without these flights of fantasy.

MEGILE
10-30-2007, 07:18 AM
Oleg please fix the bar

no no, in mother russia light refract you!

Oleg please fix muzzle flash

is impossible!

Oleg please fix the compression on the P-38 elevators.

Speed of sound is lower in america

Oleg please give the lerche 200% more thrust so it isn't the POS, all calculations allude to it being.

Be sure!

Metatron_123
10-30-2007, 07:53 AM
I really do not understand why people get so upset about the Lerche. People, seriously attempt to chill out about the subject. As Oleg had to make modifications to the design to make it feasible, just try to see it as a pet project that was included as a bonus, FOR FUN. I hope sim developers are allowed to have fun?
And in any case, NO the plane did not fly,<span class="ev_code_RED"> but neither are we really world war two pilots</span>, so just relax. Is anyone stoping you from flying Messerschmitts and Spitfires?

jarink
10-30-2007, 08:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Metatron_123:
I really do not understand why people get so upset about the Lerche. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do. It's because there have been several other planes that actually flew and were actually used during WWII submitted to 1C that have not made it into the sim. Add to those all the other a/c that have never even gotten close to being included that were far more important than some fantasy plane than never left the drawing board.

What really ruined 1946 for me and a lot of other people was it was such a departure from Oleg's previous firm insistence on <span class="ev_code_yellow">REALISM</span>. He has famously refused to accept planes even for lack of fairly simple things like cockpit references, even if the external model was great and lots of performance data was available. With these fantasy planes, that was all thrown away, which really ticked off a lot of people who saw planes sh*tcanned in the past because Oleg said they could not be modeled with historical ultra-accuracy.

Sure the planes are fun, but they really don't fit in with the legacy of the rest of the IL-2 sim.

Freelancer-1
10-30-2007, 08:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB462cid:


Welcome to last year http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That just about sums it up.

amilaninia
10-30-2007, 08:15 AM
This sim needed a flyable B5N(Kate) or B-17 more than Lerche. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

JG53Frankyboy
10-30-2007, 08:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cajun76:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by cawimmer430:
When I first flew the Lerche for the first time, I set up a QMB against B-29's at about 5,000 meters. Launched all my rockets and then couldn't wait to use the MK-103 / MK-108 cannons. Well, I did...and they were out of ammo after something like a 2-3 second burst. Darn it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

200rpg vs 20rpg with missiles IIRC. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

80rpg vs 20rpg with missiles

alert_1
10-30-2007, 08:40 AM
Poor Lerche is just a little LW compensation for PORKED Fw190As.

Metatron_123
10-30-2007, 08:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I do. It's because there have been several other planes that actually flew and were actually used during WWII submitted to 1C that have not made it into the sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this! And I would have loved a Spitfire XIV Gloster Meteor, Vampire, various British bombers, Dornier 17, Fiat G 55... and the list goes on.
But the whole thing is not that dramatic, and not worth getting upset about. I say 'shame we don't have the so and so plane' not
'****** Lerche is ruining my day because it's too fast and looks like a spaceship'

BlitzPig_DDT
10-30-2007, 09:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Metatron_123:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I do. It's because there have been several other planes that actually flew and were actually used during WWII submitted to 1C that have not made it into the sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this! And I would have loved a Spitfire XIV Gloster Meteor, Vampire, various British bombers, Dornier 17, Fiat G 55... and the list goes on.
But the whole thing is not that dramatic, and not worth getting upset about. I say 'shame we don't have the so and so plane' not
'****** Lerche is ruining my day because it's too fast and looks like a spaceship' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Suck on it plane hating sim-commies. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

The rest of us like to have fun. Oh and um.... you did BUY it didn't you? Hmm, looks like you're the ones with no principles. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif (paying for, and using, something you claim to hate so much (on the principle of the issue)

BTW, much of this red-WHINING is from a total lack of skill and tactics. Lerches are easy to beat. And they are NOT as fast as everyone makes them out to be. There are (at least) 5 allied planes that can undress a Lerche in various ways. And 1 of those 5 is a PROP. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Low_Flyer_MkIX
10-30-2007, 10:40 AM
"And 1 of those 5 is a PROP." http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/LF2/il2fb2007-09-2519-19-29-71.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/LF2/il2fb2007-09-2519-19-57-75.jpg

SeaFireLIV
10-30-2007, 10:53 AM
While I hate and only ever flew the Lerche once, I can see why it was made. It was simply an experiment in `what can we do?`

Y0RGO
10-30-2007, 10:55 AM
Someone has said I am ACE, yes?

Cajun76
10-30-2007, 10:58 AM
Gladiator FTW!!

And looking at the the Lerches stats, it looks like the Thunderbolt can run one down. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

PS-Sorry, Frankyboy is absolutely right, 80rgp with no missiles.

MEGILE
10-30-2007, 11:58 AM
I'm off to pwn some Lerches on 4.08 Jets.

Tally hoe!

Daiichidoku
10-30-2007, 12:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:

Tally hoe! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

which kind?

this one? http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/hoe.html
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/hoe-1.jpg

this one?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/hoecrack.jpg

Metatron_123
10-30-2007, 01:59 PM
[QUOTE]Suck on it plane hating sim-commies[QUOTE] Erm... I don't know if you actually read my post BlitzPig, but i'm actually agreeing with you. Even if I express myself more subtly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
Please don't call me a sim-commie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
10-30-2007, 04:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Metatron_123:
[QUOTE]Suck on it plane hating sim-commies[QUOTE] Erm... I don't know if you actually read my post BlitzPig, but i'm actually agreeing with you. Even if I express myself more subtly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
Please don't call me a sim-commie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, you said that you still don't like it, and would rather other, boring, been-there-done-that planes to have been included in it's stead. And that's the same thing.

Besides, I was more talking about a group, not you specifically. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

crucislancer
10-30-2007, 05:20 PM
I've played around with the Lerche once or twice. It was fun for what it is. In fact, I remember laughing quite a bit because of the weirdness of it. Entertaining, at least. When I have a moment maybe I'll set up a quick mission with it, just for a laugh. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
10-30-2007, 10:30 PM
Did a little messing around tonight. I got BlitzPig_Frat to help me. He normally kills me when we dogfight 1v1. So he took the Lerche.

I took a 25lb Spit and killed him, then he came back up a second time and I got hits on him, and he fried his engines trying to compete with me, and eventually bailed (and I scored the second kill). At that point I ran out of gas.

The 5 planes I was thinking of in a previous post are - Bi-1 and 6, MiG-9, YP-80, and Spit +25.

That also means that concievably, the P-51, P-47, Tempest, and Yak 3 and 9 (especially the rocket boosted 3, and also the rocket La7) could take it down as well.

In fact, under the right circumstances, any plane in the game can take it out.

Get them low and suck them into a turn fight, and most good turning planes will hand the Lerche's their azz.

If they are high and playing hard to get, take one of the rockets (especially the Bi-6). Rocket power trumps overblown piston VTOL power.

If you can get alt over them, the Jug and Mustang (exemplary divers) can bring the pain.

If you can take the time to get alt, the MiG-9 and YP-80 are great choices. They have the speed to run away from it (MiG especially), the zoom ability to play with it, and the YP-80 will out turn it.

Lerches do NOT like to fly slow. And they have to land and take off too. Landing especially, they are vulnerable. And short legged so they can't land too far from an extended fight. Any plane in the game can rape them at their base. (kinda like jets, both IRL and in the game, actually)

In a pit on, no externals server, they have very limited SA due to virtually no rear vis.

The Spitfire +25 is the best prop to tangle with them though as they (the Spit) turn like Zeros and have instant cool off (if you overheat, cut to 85%, it goes away, and firewall it again - neat feature really. Makes it the most potent prop in the game, but nevermind....). But if they get greedy, they can be 0wnz0red by Hurris and I-153s low over base.

However, if the Lerche pilot plays it smart, he can be VERY hard to beat. That's when you break out the rockets and 1 up them. And with a little concerted effort (aka, "teamwork") you can drive them out of their Lerches, or even out of the server.

Really, like I said, they are excellent point defence weapons, and deadly when used in a certain way, but really, not that spectacular or hard to beat. I'd rather take a Komet for point defence over base rapage than a Lerche - it's more likely to get airborne, and will out climb, out run, and out turn the Lerche, and out climb and out E just about every other plane in the game (rocket power baby! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ).

So stop worrying, take the time to learn to handle them, and let the rest of us have our fun with them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

DKoor
10-31-2007, 02:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Did a little messing around tonight. I got BlitzPig_Frat to help me. He normally kills me when we dogfight 1v1. So he took the Lerche.

I took a 25lb Spit and killed him, then he came back up a second time and I got hits on him, and he fried his engines trying to compete with me, and eventually bailed (and I scored the second kill). At that point I ran out of gas. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yeah........ planes are a big factor in this game..... player skill plays its part, but still cannot be decisive in many cases.

I luv to mix it up in such krazy fights.....

Daiichidoku
10-31-2007, 08:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
In fact, under the right circumstances, any plane in the game can take it out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

non-point
this is true of any type in game, even unarmed types


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The Spitfire +25 is the best prop to tangle with them though as they (the Spit) turn like Zeros and have instant cool off (if you overheat, cut to 85%, it goes away, and firewall it again - neat feature really. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

cutting to 85% cools most engines this way

that you can run 85% on +25 and get only -4kph off top level speed, now THATS a neat feature...no, wait, its teh ghey...no, wait, its a kommernist ghey feature

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
but really, not that spectacular or hard to beat.

So stop worrying, take the time to learn to handle them, and let the rest of us have our fun with them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you miss the point (most) ppl have with lurch, its not that its too good at anything, or even not too good at anything, but that its given a fanciful FM based on...NOTHING...considering the "historical accuracy" issue in FB, ppl are rankjled they got something the never flew, instead of say, a DeWotine perhaps? u can HARDLY say a D.520 is "been there, done that" now, can you?

a lot of ppl dont hate types cuz they great, or love em cuz they 'uber'....most who hate lurch for these reasons also hate the lagg3RD...not becuase its uber...its quite the sad POS really...but cuz its useless, had no production, took space of what could have been a MUCH better, and sensible choice (gloster meteor anyone?), and its FM is artifically "boosted", despite the pursuit of "historical accuracy" FB has prided itself on for so long



BTW, you failed to mention the Go-229, the best lurch killer in game....in fact, gotha handily embarrasses and dismisses your rocket Komet (the La7 of propless fighters) as well...or your +25, or whatever (only the FM-doctored Ta 183 comes even remotely close)

BlitzPig_DDT
10-31-2007, 09:03 AM
Daii, the Spit +25 cools down INSTANTLY (well ok, in about 2 to 3 seconds) when dropping to 85% and then you can firewall it again. That's what I mean. However, you're right about the lose of only 4kph in speed as well.

I didn't mention any Axis aircraft because so many people are afraid to fly open plane sets. Personally, I love it. There's NOTHING better than trashing commie planes with US planes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif (Only trashing commie planes with LW comes close. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

The Wing is my favorite plane in the game. Even despite Oleg's nerfing of it at the insistance of the whiners. He had it right the first time (like some other planes I could mention). Horten used a lift distribution curve that increased yaw stability with speed (and lift). It's been artificially worsened to appease red-whiners. (and it still has a broken ASI)

Of course, when you consider the high-lift design of it's aerofoil and raw wing area, it's no surprise that it's a beast in a knife fight. It should be.

And as for the Lerche (Lair-cha - like Porsch-ah), I refer you to Megiles comment about it's performance and how it's "faster than jets". It's not.

People allow the other planes in, but not that one. It's because of it's performance.

And the ONLY thing they did was add more power and a gas activated stability system. The latter was certainly possible with the tools and materials available back then. The power we can overlook slightly, especially w/r/t other stuff, and from there, it's calculated like everything else.

I love how people praise Oleg when he makes a plane they like fly well, and wave evidence of where he got it right as proof he is 1 step removed from the almighty, but then when they find something they don't like, suddenly it's all "fantasy" and bogus. Nevermind that everything is calculated in the same way, using the same physics engine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

The LaGG3RD should have been called the LaGG3RDU or something. But as BBB pointed out in another thread, development would have continued in a direction different from what we saw in reality. And so it's perfectly reasonable to have them boost the thrust output on the LaGG3RD. But you have a point that it's not technically a LaGG3RD at that point either, thus they should have boosted AND renamed it.

D.250? Another boring prop-powered **** plane? Yes - been-there-done-that. Nobody has ever done late PTO that I am aware of - give me a Tigercat and a Bearcat. THAT'S interesting. Nobody has ever done a "secret weapons of the Japanese airforce". THAT would be interesting (the larget Komet design and the smaller 262 design and the second gen Komet they planned and so-on).

For 'druthers', I'd rather have had a '46 229 (stuff the 2nd Gen 262 engines in it - same size, more thrust), or a Bearcat, or a Tigercat, or a Vampire, or a Meteor, or any Japanese jet/rocket project. But it doesn't matter, the Lerche is still bad *** and easy to deal with - and it didn't bump anything else, despite what people desperately wish to beleive, it was done on one member of the dev team's spare time.

jarink
10-31-2007, 09:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Nobody has ever done late PTO that I am aware of - give me a Tigercat and a Bearcat. THAT'S interesting. Nobody has ever done a "secret weapons of the Japanese airforce". THAT would be interesting (the larget Komet design and the smaller 262 design and the second gen Komet they planned and so-on). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dynamix's "Aces of the Pacific: 1946" circa 1992
(I actually may still have the diskette at home in the garage! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif )

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">From Wikipedia:
If the 1946 Expansion Pack is installed, at the end of the war, the player may choose to continue in an alternate history in which atomic bombs were never used on Japan. The game calls the campaign Operation Coronet--the name the US Military used for the planned, conventional invasion of Japan. This extra campaign contains numerous prototype aircraft that were developed before the war's end but never saw combat in World War II (F2G "Super" Corsair, F7F Tigercat, F8F Bearcat, the P-80 Shooting Star, and even a Japanese jet-powered aircraft, the Nakajima Kikka). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In other words, "been-there-done-that".

As for the Late-war Luftwaffe stuff - see "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe" by Lucasarts in 1991.

MEGILE
10-31-2007, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:

Anti-fun, plane hating sim commies suck. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:


D.250? Another boring prop-powered **** plane? Yes - been-there-done-that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looks like we got another plane-hating commie in our midst. oh noes!

Daiichidoku
10-31-2007, 11:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Daii, the Spit +25 cools down INSTANTLY (well ok, in about 2 to 3 seconds) when dropping to 85% and then you can firewall it again. That's what I mean. However, you're right about the lose of only 4kph in speed as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

rgrt...although the ability to fly at 85% allows a "surplus" of non-overheat time over flyign it at say 99%; this clearly gives an advantage once u enter combat and go MAX for the duration


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
so many people are afraid of jets </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

fixed

in arcade wwhere i mostly am, many ppl want open sets, inasmuch as ensuring they will have yak3P/la73xb20/+25 and a few others; yet even a whiff of kerosene and mr sensitive goes to crybabys house for vacation, they do like the inconvenience of having to look over shoulder...dont have patience or skill or willingness to learn to kill jets, and cant fly them

personally, i like FULLY open sets, but only aracde...has to be at very least semi-historical if i cant remove the cockpit

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Oleg's nerfing of it at the insistance of the whiners.
Horten used a lift distribution curve that increased yaw stability with speed (and lift).
(and it still has a broken ASI)
Of course, when you consider the high-lift design of it's aerofoil and raw wing area, it's no surprise that it's a beast in a knife fight. It should be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i dont recall any real whining over its perf, only that it is a 'fantasy' type..any links?:P

i found it hasnt changed much at all, exceptign the airbrake performance...or that is, the sudden loss of it after a certain patch...it seems AS increases now when deployed LMAO http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
And as for the Lerche (Lair-cha - like Porsch-ah), I refer you to Megiles comment about it's performance and how it's "faster than jets". It's not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i know...u know i know

he knows that too, but hes not about to let u off the line so easy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif otherwise he would have said it out-accels jets



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
People allow the other planes in, but not that one. It's because of it's performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i must disagree here, that its not perf, but its stigma, as i explained prev post

i must also take u to task on this, u say its not becuz of its perf, yet one post ago u state that its perfectly killable, and "not spectacular"...do u imply they omit it cuz its not good enough?
take the lagg3RD...never found in servers...why? it cant possibly be viewed as an uber threat, its a complete dog...its never seen becuz A)...it is a dog, lol...and B)...cuz its a "fake" FM, not based on hard data/FM intentionally ahistorical

sorry, this is why i cant agree as to why luuurch is usually banned



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
And the ONLY thing they did was add more power and a gas activated stability system. The latter was certainly possible with the tools and materials available back then. The power we can overlook slightly, especially w/r/t other stuff, and from there, it's calculated like everything else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

power can be overlooked..depending upon how much was added...do you have any figures for projected RL vs actual game, plz?

but power still rankles, seeing it upped for lurch, when Tempest has been proven to be eq. to a +9, and the most numerous +11 variant is denied us (of course, yak1B gets upped "despite [1C's] complete lack of time)....and others that could stand to have "power ups"

same goes for the P38..lets not get into low spd regime and compress...why not historically pure 1C add stability to 38 and make it far closer to reality? PFT...


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The LaGG3RD </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

again, why not up power to give extra planes, that are historical, and representative, esp given that it "takes no time"? if one can envisage the lagg recieving deeper development, then CERTAINLY the 262A1/2, he 162A2, gotha would be a shoe-in for the same treatment (and clearly would have been, had peace not broke out firsthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )....again, this would have taken "no time" to do

renamed and boosted? so...historically accurate FB should have inc a compeltely fictional plane? LMAO....Luthier`"over my dead body, a Bearcat in this sim" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif....


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
D.250? Another boring prop-powered **** plane? Yes - been-there-done-that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

where? when? in combat in a batle of france scenario?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
me a Tigercat and a Bearcat. THAT'S interesting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes it is, immensely so
many more agree...this is part of why ppl hate lurch and lagg3rd et al as well, its felt what was involved could have, should have been used for good, not lameness

also, see above Luthier quote on Bearcat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif...what flows more freely in this case? the irony or hyprocrisy?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
has ever done a "secret weapons of the Japanese airforce". THAT would be interesting (the larget Komet design and the smaller 262 design and the second gen Komet they planned and so-on).
no one has ever done late PTO that I am aware of </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ki84C/Ki46-Otsu-Kaizo/G4M2e Model 24 Tei w/Ohka....could even argue that we have a post war B29, with the 20mm in the tail deleted http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
For 'druthers', I'd rather have had a '46 229 (stuff the 2nd Gen 262 engines in it - same size, more thrust), or a Bearcat, or a Tigercat, or a Vampire, or a Meteor, or any Japanese jet/rocket project. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

see above for comments on "power ups" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
see above comments on "meteor instead of laggRD"http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
But it doesn't matter, the Lerche is still bad *** and easy to deal with </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

again, that is is uber or not really is not what drives ppl's love or hate of that &*^_(^&_&*(49()+&^%(+_() butt plug http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
- and it didn't bump anything else, despite what people desperately wish to beleive, it was done on one member of the dev team's spare time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no reason to imagine it did bump anything..or the 109Z or others, for that matter

but IMO, 1C should have said that they would only accept certain types for submission, based upon rational, practical decisions for the game, that would best reflect what most ppl want in a "WWII flight combat sim"~ planes that represent those types that saw combat, or had signifigant traits, all while having at least double-digit production, and/or complete flight testing
perhaps these modellers would have not submitted anythign is this case...but if they did, it would be a type that has FAR more use, from airquake DF to hyper-accurate pilot campaigns/online wars



http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif outta breath after all that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Daiichidoku
10-31-2007, 11:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Dynamix's "Aces of the Pacific: 1946" circa 1992
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

rgrt

http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=review-732&images

i still have a sega saturn and "wing arms" (1995)game
included hellcat, mustang, 262, zero, spit, P 38...and a J7W1 Shinden

im alomst tempted to buy FSX or whatever is that one with a flyable He219, jsut for that alone!

MEGILE
10-31-2007, 11:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:


also, see above Luthier quote on Bearcat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif...what flows more freely in this case? the irony or hyprocrisy?


</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe Luthier said "Lerche over my dead parakeet"

Apparently, chirpy died last year of avian flu.

BlitzPig_DDT
10-31-2007, 12:13 PM
Daii,

Ok.... too much to continue the line by line quote style.

Lerche performance - it's phenomenal. Most people who b|tch about that 'aircraft' make references to it's performance. (as the original post in this thread shows) When maps have Ta-183s and X4s and magic soviet (100%) copies of German turbines that mysteriously don't suffer the same problems, and the Bi-6, and mystical Spit +25 and so on, they leave out the Lerche. Clearly it's not about the fact that it never flew - IIRC the Bi-6 never got made into a prototype due to the Bi-1's nasty mach tuck which caused the projects cancellation, and the better than the original yet identical to it copies of engines are bogus, and the 229 and 183 never flew as we see them in the game, but people include them. Ditto the late 262 and 162s. The conclusion one must draw is that the issue is NOT the fact that something wasn't used or didn't fly as a prototype, but rather than the Lerche is a serious beast. And my counter point to that is that people just don't know how to fly and don't understand it's weaknesses or limitations. It's just "he shot me down! Waaaa!" whining.

No incongruencies in the stance there. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But you seem to be right about him not letting it go - he's taken to quoting out of context and TOTALLY getting things wrong. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

G4M... that's the Betty, isn't it? What's so special about ours? The Ki-84C is no big deal either. Just an 84 with cannons. counter point to the F4U-1C. That hardly constitutes late war PTO and/or Secret Weapons of the Japanese as we don't have the late war 'Cats, or the Japanese weird pusher thing (is that hte Shinden?), or the 2 versions of the Komet or the smaller, lighter 262, etc, etc.

Speaking of the late 'Cats, the reason we don't have them is obvious - It would piss everyone off. The soviet fans, the UFO-rsair and runstang fanbois, the Spit-whiners, everyone. It was fear and loathing that kept them out. Of course, I also recall hearing that Oleg took over PF after initially not wanting to be involved and so '46 additions can't necessarily be compared to pre-PF release sentiments.

And speaking of other sims... so what, we have 2? If that's the case, then WWI has been done a hell of a lot more than the late PTO/SWotJ (Knights of the Sky, Red Baron, Blue Max, FS-WWI, OFF, and the TargetWare one (forget hte name), plus the one in developmet on this engine). And most people feel that WWI is under-represented, ergo.....

Now, I'm a plane wh0re, and I love ALL the planes we have in the sim, the weirder the better. I loved the fact that the Ost Front was unique and never done before, ditto the Finn War. Though the latter really could have used more planes to flesh it out. However, even though more of those planes would have been nice, and even though I would like to have even a Storch as a multi-position (online) flyable.... it's still all more of the same **** we've seen ad-nauseum. How many times has WWII, particularly WWII Europe, been done? More times than can be listed, and it's always the same thing. Prop powered fighters, from about '40 to '44, from the major powers. All the "important" types have been done over and over and over and over and over again. The secondary and tertiary planes may be "different", but they are still just a different take on the same thing.

That's why the super-late war and what-ifs rock. And why a between war, ficitonal conflict would rock. I'm ALL ABOUT zeppelin carriers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

But, anyway.....

Regarding the stance, IL2 was originally just going to be about the IL2 Sturmovik itself and nothing else too. Should we hold Oleg in contempt for adding 109s and 190s? As time moved on and he accomplished goals, his desires, and those of his fan base, changed and he decided to take on new challenges. As long as he applies the same science to all the flyables (and he does), then there is no problem. Either you trust him for the Lerche, or you don't trust him for the Spitfire. It can't go both ways. The 109Z is a perfect example, people pissed and moaned about it because it had no real world test data. Yet Oleg new damn well how it would fly because it was such a sound and basic aero-engineering principle. I think the real problem is.... people want to throw charts at each other and flame one another and without charts they can't do that and it takes the fun out of it for them.

Um.... I thought there was more but this is a novel as it is and it's hard to write something this long while at work being distracted all the time. lol

Phil_K
10-31-2007, 02:52 PM
If you are going to have Lerches, then you also need to have cybernautic pterodactyls, spaceships that look like 16th century galleons and giant sandworms erupting out of the Earth.

If you aren't going to do it properly, then you shouldn't do it at all. And that is where the Lerche fails.

BlitzPig_DDT
11-06-2007, 08:31 AM
Found something interesting last night that some of you (like Megile and PhilK) might find interesting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

On the fictional online Mountain Map (the Olegovo one), there is a concrete base in a valley on the side of a mountain in the NW corner of the map. To me, that is the "blue side" of the map, I'm not really sure why, but anyway.... that base is at 1700 and change meters elevation. The Lerche won't take off. You have to get the engines at full spin, then push forward on your stick, start "wheeling" it on one tail wheel, and as you pick up speed you can eventually get off the ground. But you almost certainly will not be able to land there.

On Crimea, there is a concrete base in the SW corner of the map, with an elevation of about 40m. There, it takes off just fine. And I was wrong about my earlier comment - it won't go vert to 8km. It got to about 6300 and change before it started to fall (overheating well by that time). From take off, it eventually reached about 180kmh, and around 4Km it started to slow down. Once reaching 0 IAS, it fell back down (still with the stability system engaged), and very quickly reached about 180kmh again. Eventually, it slowed down and reached a hover around 1550m or so. Once my VSI read 0, I fired the guns. It pushed me down to about a 5m/s sink rate, and, since it pushed me down into thicker air, the props had more bite, plus the ammo was chucked overboard, so once the guns stopped, I bounced up to about 1600m like a spring. By that time, the bearings were singing so I bailed. Once I bailed, it shot up another 100m or so.

If anything, this little gem highlights just how amazing Oleg's physics engine really is.

And in turn, we see that it's actually not that far fetched of an aircraft either.

Ok, first, let's look at the thrust needed - only has to be greater than 1:1. I have no idea how much the Lerche was supposed to weigh, but... the DB605D was putting out 1800hp at sea level in the 109K4. That's at 2800rpm. At 2800rpm, 1800hp is about 3376.29lb/ft of torque. Most engines peak their tq much higher than a meager 2800rpm. So just spinning it faster, while almost certainly producing more tq, even if we assume it tables and stays there, spinning it at 4000rpm boosts hp to 2571.43. (and that's what Honda does, they produce torque-less wonders that they spin the ever-lovin' pi$$ out of to produce a usable amount of hp, and give rise to the ricer's favorite fake metric - hp/l, but n/m)

Also, bear in mind that the DBs were overcompressed to produce better power up high. This limits the amount of boost you can run down low, and thus, the amount of power you can run down low.

Drop the compression (sacrificing some high alt performance), crank up the boost, and spin the engine faster, and you're doubling or even tripling the power. With a little more individual effort and care, you can polish even more hp out of them.

I dunno exactly how hp translates to lbs of thrust in a prop either, but given the P:W of the engine, and the potential of what can be done - it's not really so far fetched.

Bear in mind, the Pogo DID take off - it was possible to develop that kind of power back then.

And if that wouldn't be enough, run a different fuel. There is a saying, "gasoline is for cleaning parts, alcohol is for drinking, and Nitro-Methane is for racing". Look at the O2 content of each of those fuels. As you go down the line the Stoichiometric ratio decreses (gets closer to 1:1, meaning more fuel per air, meaning more power). It's how top fuel dragsters put out like 8000hp. Granted, they'd melt down if they ran more than a few seconds, but that isn't the point. E-85, or straight Meth would produce more power than B4 or C3, and have a higher octane allowing even more boost (and run cooler allowing denser intake charges, and in turn, more power).

Now, the stability system.... run a compressor off the generator, bottle the air, use puffs to vector the tail, and tie in some thrust vectoring flaps to the pilots control, and you're off. All it takes is a gyro and some Komandogeraet-type tech and lots of pilot skill, but it's certainly do-able.

They even did somethings with the design that put it at an advantage over the Pogo - it's circular wing and tubular fuselage. This reduced the effect of wind, and made it the same in all directions (the Pogo was like a regular plane that landed on it's tail, it has a huge veritble sail to catch the wind whild vert), and created a sort of ducted fan, which should have increased thrust (basically for free), and the pilot's seating postion (in the Lerche) made landing a bit more easy too.

So why not put masses of these into service then, if it were possible and if Oleg's is even close to the kind of performance they would have had?

They can't fly slow, they have no failure modes (if you are too low to bail, pray fast), they only produce enough thrust at near sea-level to take off so they can't be used in many places, rough weather would ground them, they are exceedingly short ranged due to their take off and landing method (both because of the time and power, and because they can't carry too much fuel, otherwise they'd not get off the ground - even more so if they had to use alternate fuel, it would burn through it faster still), they would have to sacrifice high alt performance to make it work, payload (and even pilot size and weight) are extremely constrained, and it takes a lot of strategic resources and puts them at risk (not to mention build complexity).

If all you want is a point defence interceptor, the Komet is the better choice - rocket fuel and wood are not strategic materials. The performance is more than adequate, and a rocket, unlike the Lerche, will INCREASE climb rate and speed with altitude. It'll work at all takeoff altitudes, it's more conventional and easier to build, puts pilots at less risk (at least in the case of a loss of thrust anyway lol), and can operate in more weather conditions.

Once it's limitations came to light, it would never be produced. That's the real reason the Pogo was abandoned.

However, none of that means that it couldn't fly. Under the right weather conditions, it COULD and WOULD work, if they had put enough time and effort into it. And I guarentee you it would be much like what we have in game in terms of performance.

Yes it's weird, yes it's something that would never have been accepted by the RLM, but if you hate on it because you think it's impossible - you is wrong, be sure.

The more I look at it, the more I like it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

On any map that includes it, unless it's a flat out free for all fun map, it should be limited by a scripted server. But it should be included for flair and flavor. It's too cool not to use.

BTW - on that mountains map, I had the Bi-6 doing 250mph IAS at 50,000+ft (about 400kph @ a little over 15,000m). Still had plenty of go-juice left, but I was gliding. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Daiichidoku
11-06-2007, 09:03 AM
u know i know i owe u still, but hit n run mf! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

atmosphere no diff over 30,000ft in game no?

what will the b29 do over 30k? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
11-06-2007, 11:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
u know i know i owe u still, but hit n run mf! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">atmosphere no diff over 30,000ft in game no? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Somewhere up there, not sure, but it still had to climb up there and gain speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif That thing is a beast. I'm half tempted to try to get to know it better, but that mach tuck, and it's lack of presence on maps, holds me back.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">what will the b29 do over 30k? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No idea. I rarely mess with AI planes, OR heavies (kinda slow, lumbering and boring to me - I like rockets and jets. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

Daiichidoku
11-06-2007, 11:46 AM
i fly b 29 from pit, with a few gunner postions too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

re-evaluate the B 29, it will knock ur socks off, particularly in 2nd SC over 14,000

MrMojok
11-07-2007, 03:04 AM
DDT, I just want to chime in here and say how absolutely bizarre it is that in 95% of your posts on here, you manage to find a way to disparage what you call the "fanboi" planes like the Corsair and Mustang, yet you defend to the death, the Lurch. And call people who don't like it "plane-hating Commie sim-haters".

No, not "Ler-che, like Por-sche".

It's LURCH, like the butler. It *deserves* to be called that. And so do you. In fact, that is your new name.

It's one thing to be a fan of the F6F or the P-47, but you have written a new book of weirdness in this thread. You never cease to amaze me. I think you are quite probably insane.

DKoor
11-07-2007, 03:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
i fly b 29 from pit, with a few gunner postions too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

re-evaluate the B 29, it will knock ur socks off, particularly in 2nd SC over 14,000 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yep............ B-29 owns pretty much everything except multi-Mk108 equipped crates.
Quad .50s FTW!

BlitzPig_DDT
11-07-2007, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
DDT, I just want to chime in here and say how absolutely bizarre it is that in 95% of your posts on here, you manage to find a way to disparage what you call the "fanboi" planes like the Corsair and Mustang, yet you defend to the death, the Lurch. And call people who don't like it "plane-hating Commie sim-haters".

No, not "Ler-che, like Por-sche".

It's LURCH, like the butler. It *deserves* to be called that. And so do you. In fact, that is your new name.

It's one thing to be a fan of the F6F or the P-47, but you have written a new book of weirdness in this thread. You never cease to amaze me. I think you are quite probably insane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey! I will have you know that I do NOT suffer from insanity. ...I enjoy every minute of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

It is a fact that the corsair and mustang are fanboi planes. They are overhyped, and overpopular. They don't deserve the glory they have.

The Lerche (and yes, it is Lair-cha, or Ler-cha, it is a proper name, as well as a German word ("Skylark")) is hated by most. That means it's inherently cool. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I know why people have such a problem with it - they look at it, the fact that it was never even so much as a prototype (even the Ta-183 was in the wind tunnel and ordered into production), and then they look at all the AI-only planes currently in the game and ask why. Why couldn't we have more "normal" planes, like the Tigercat, Bearcat, torp-bombers for USN and IJN, the Kika, the Shusui, the Shinden, etc, etc.

Hell, I even agree with that thinking. I'd even prefer a cockpit for the Emily over a Lerche. (I know, I know, Oleg said "no 4 engine aircraft in this sim", um.... but what about the TB3? - but n/m)

Thing is though, it doesn't matter. It is what it is, we have what we have. And I for one, love every plane they give us. Even if I never fly them (like the IL-2 - The cockpit view just sucks much ***. And I'm not keen on the Pe-2/3 either, but I'm glad we have both of them). I'd love for the Dutch Fokkers and even a multi-seat (online) flyable Storch (think of acting as a spotter for CAS 110s and 190s in a COOP). But, as I said, the more planes the better, and the weirder the better. And of course, if it's weird late war (and/or concept), even better still! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (afterall, rockets and jets obviously rule. http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/JetHelmetSmilie.gif )

So, yeah.. we already have the fanboi rides that have been done a bazillion times in every sim known to man. Time for something different. But that said, I'm a plane wh0re who will enjoy anything I can get my hands on.

And as for why I "defend" it... well, the trouble with those people I referred to above? They don't want to admit that they are basically having a 3 year olds temper tantrum about it. Instead they feel they have to shroud their true feelings in santimonius BS about FMs, actual flight tests, numbers produced, and in game performance. They simply don't have the balls to be honest.

And well, the fact is, their BS is just that, BS. It WAS possible back then, WOULD have worked (IF they pursued it intensely enough, and used it in the right conditions), it's NOT unbeatable (or even hard to beat - like they claim), and it's NOT even unreasonable when you really examine it. As mentioned, it really highlights just how amazing this physics engine really is. Either you trust him for everything, or you claim it's ALL arcade BS, and in that case, why play it? (and we know it's not all arcade BS, and is in fact one of the most accurate simulations around)

So, um..... yeah... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
11-07-2007, 08:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
i fly b 29 from pit, with a few gunner postions too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

re-evaluate the B 29, it will knock ur socks off, particularly in 2nd SC over 14,000 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yep............ B-29 owns pretty much everything except multi-Mk108 equipped crates.
Quad .50s FTW! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh, how 'bout dual Mk-103s? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

DKoor
11-07-2007, 08:31 AM
Not good for deflection in dogfight..... 108s aren't perfect either but are still better.
And yes, we regularly dogfight in B-29s.

BlitzPig_DDT
11-07-2007, 08:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Not good for deflection in dogfight..... 108s aren't perfect either but are still better.
And yes, we regularly dogfight in B-29s. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 103 _should_ have a better ballistic profile than the 108.

Several versions ago (I think when the A8 was first released), I would go after huge bomber formations and would try to hit them just outside convergeance, so one round hit each opposite wing and disconnect them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

But, one of my favorite (if the favorite) planes for DF in this sim is the 229. There are times I wish for the greater ROF of the 108, but I tend to get the kills. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MrMojok
11-07-2007, 11:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
DDT, I just want to chime in here and say how absolutely bizarre it is that in 95% of your posts on here, you manage to find a way to disparage what you call the "fanboi" planes like the Corsair and Mustang, yet you defend to the death, the Lurch. And call people who don't like it "plane-hating Commie sim-haters".

No, not "Ler-che, like Por-sche".

It's LURCH, like the butler. It *deserves* to be called that. And so do you. In fact, that is your new name.

It's one thing to be a fan of the F6F or the P-47, but you have written a new book of weirdness in this thread. You never cease to amaze me. I think you are quite probably insane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey! I will have you know that I do NOT suffer from insanity. ...I enjoy every minute of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

It is a fact that the corsair and mustang are fanboi planes. They are overhyped, and overpopular. They don't deserve the glory they have.

The Lerche (and yes, it is Lair-cha, or Ler-cha, it is a proper name, as well as a German word ("Skylark")) is hated by most. That means it's inherently cool. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I know why people have such a problem with it - they look at it, the fact that it was never even so much as a prototype (even the Ta-183 was in the wind tunnel and ordered into production), and then they look at all the AI-only planes currently in the game and ask why. Why couldn't we have more "normal" planes, like the Tigercat, Bearcat, torp-bombers for USN and IJN, the Kika, the Shusui, the Shinden, etc, etc.

Hell, I even agree with that thinking. I'd even prefer a cockpit for the Emily over a Lerche. (I know, I know, Oleg said "no 4 engine aircraft in this sim", um.... but what about the TB3? - but n/m)

Thing is though, it doesn't matter. It is what it is, we have what we have. And I for one, love every plane they give us. Even if I never fly them (like the IL-2 - The cockpit view just sucks much ***. And I'm not keen on the Pe-2/3 either, but I'm glad we have both of them). I'd love for the Dutch Fokkers and even a multi-seat (online) flyable Storch (think of acting as a spotter for CAS 110s and 190s in a COOP). But, as I said, the more planes the better, and the weirder the better. And of course, if it's weird late war (and/or concept), even better still! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (afterall, rockets and jets obviously rule. http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/JetHelmetSmilie.gif )

So, yeah.. we already have the fanboi rides that have been done a bazillion times in every sim known to man. Time for something different. But that said, I'm a plane wh0re who will enjoy anything I can get my hands on.

And as for why I "defend" it... well, the trouble with those people I referred to above? They don't want to admit that they are basically having a 3 year olds temper tantrum about it. Instead they feel they have to shroud their true feelings in santimonius BS about FMs, actual flight tests, numbers produced, and in game performance. They simply don't have the balls to be honest.

And well, the fact is, their BS is just that, BS. It WAS possible back then, WOULD have worked (IF they pursued it intensely enough, and used it in the right conditions), it's NOT unbeatable (or even hard to beat - like they claim), and it's NOT even unreasonable when you really examine it. As mentioned, it really highlights just how amazing this physics engine really is. Either you trust him for everything, or you claim it's ALL arcade BS, and in that case, why play it? (and we know it's not all arcade BS, and is in fact one of the most accurate simulations around)

So, um..... yeah... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It IS a damn fun thing to fly, I'll give you that. I've been messing around with it recently.

Phil_K
11-07-2007, 03:32 PM
Blitzpig_DDT

If you are not a defence lawyer already, then you should become one.

It's your true vocation in life..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
11-07-2007, 10:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">BTW - on that mountains map, I had the Bi-6 doing 250mph IAS at 50,000+ft (about 400kph @ a little over 15,000m). Still had plenty of go-juice left, but I was gliding. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

BlitzPig_El and I were just messing around on Crimea, and we took the Bi-6 from the Simferopol base out to AC-12, which is about 200Km (a little over actually), and he hit about 75 to 80,000 feet, I hit 93,000 (and was doing about 180mph IAS there (that's about 515mph TAS), and then we turned around, went back, and landed. So that's over 400Km. And with the lack of elevator up there, it was probably around 450 to 500Km http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Not too shabby range (and alt) for a rocket fighter.

Dammit, we need more servers with Rockets on them!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

MEGILE
11-08-2007, 04:53 AM
I am a big Mustang and Corsair flyer, but all I get is hate hate hate.

Next people will be telling me wonderwoman flyers are defficient. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

DKoor
11-08-2007, 05:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
Next people will be telling me wonderwoman flyers are defficient. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I luv the purport of it all........... those are such a great debates..... pro, con and all that stuff........

....makes me l.m.a.o. every time without exception.

Bearcat99
11-08-2007, 06:01 AM
I say thye more the merrier.. Id love to see a flyable Avenger... of the same quality that the rest of the planes are in here mind you... but it isn't so... IMO the addition of the Lerche and any of the other stuff takes nothing away from the quality of the sim.. and in actuality adds to it's uniqueness.. Bottom line... you bought it fly what you want... and until you can make your own pits of similar qualoty and get them added to thye sim .... hush....

Bearcat99
11-08-2007, 07:55 AM
Kinda brings this blast from the past to mind (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/373108753?r=403109063#403109063) doesnt it...