1. #1
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Share this post

  3. #3
    na85's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,722
    May I ask what the criteria are for starting a new part? Is it 25-ish pages?
    Share this post

  4. #4
    The guideline that has been established is 20 pages. Anything over that can cause connection lag. I let this run over 20 pages for three reasons:
    1. I was asleep at the switch.
    2. I thought it may be closed for personal insults.
    3. Natural death.

    I was wrong on two accounts.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    na85's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,722
    No big deal, just curious
    Share this post

  6. #6
    TheGrunch's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,019
    Oh well, may as well continue.
    Can I point out that you still have no idea of the initial speed and altitude differences of the aircraft, what the 190 pilot did in between the start of the turn and Johnson spotting him again (a yo-yo would be a good move), what Johnson meant by "graying out" (entirely speculation on your part).
    I'd also point out that being on "opposite sides of what seemed to be an ever-decreasing circle" does not dictate that this circle was made parallel to the horizon, that we know nothing of Johnson's 1 vs. 1 piloting skill, and that the fact that he pulled into "the tightest of shuddering vertical turns" rather suggests that he wasn't making a sustained maneuver at all.
    David Hume's views on humans as believable witnesses to miracles come to mind. Just because someone sees something happen once doesn't mean that they saw *everything* that happened. And just because they wrote an account of it doesn't mean that you know *exactly* what they meant.
    Any historian has to take account of the ambiguities in the written accounts they read.
    You cannot resolve ambiguities by ignoring the possibility that they don't support your views.
    And I have to say that I'm just as baffled as Andy about your reference to a wholly irrelevant Descartes quote. If we were all skeptical of our own existences then perhaps that would be a relevant phrase to calm our minds.
    Anyway, if anyone should be quoting Descartes it should be me, given that I'm telling you to take a more strictly empirical approach to the text, again.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Ok, Round three...

    Link to Rechlin test (11 December 1941)between bf109f4 and Fw190a2:
    http://beim-zeugmeister.de/zeu.../index.php?id=23&L=1
    It's in German, lol! A translation of sorts is given below the photocopy.
    Relevent bit to this discussion (possibly?) is on page 4, section d).

    Photographs of all of the British report (11 July 1942) of tests of captured FW190's @ ww2aircraft.net. You will have to register to see it. Great site BTW.
    http://www.ww2aircraft.net/for...90-papers-22545.html


    Original of Gaston444's Page 1, post number 1, "Russian Combat Experiences with the FW-190" from Tactical and Technical Trends published November 4, 1943, (Did anyone read it? Basically how to counter the fw190 in a turning fight flying an La5), here:
    http://www.lonesentry.com/arti...an-combat-fw190.html

    Companion piece to above, Soviet fighter Tactics against Me109 and Fw190, taken from a book published in 1943, (the only credit given, I assume it was a Russian book):
    http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsIII.htm

    La5 Pilot's Handbook, English translation. States stall speed of La5,:
    http://www.mission4today.com/i...Base&op=show&kid=507
    Again you will have to register to view, but you should all be already if you fly IL2.

    Good luck!
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Good stuff Jameson.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by blairgowrie:
    The guideline that has been established is 20 pages. Anything over that can cause connection lag. I let this run over 20 pages for three reasons:
    1. I was asleep at the switch.
    2. I thought it may be closed for personal insults.
    3. Natural death.

    I was wrong on two accounts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Would it be possible to create a separate sub-forum for these sort of threads? That way they could be grouped more easily and avoid bunging up the main area. Not sure what you'd call such a new forum though. The Usual Suspects perhaps?
    Share this post

  10. #10
    na85's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,722
    Troll Central
    Share this post

Page 1 of 20 12311 ... Last ►►