The posts from Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14) on the "warbirds.training newsgroup" are archived on this page (with some comments from others). The subjects cover everything from advice to new users to advanced tactics... all aimed, of course, at keeping you alive longer in the arena... thus "Arena Basics".

front

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: How to climb in 109 and other planes

Message: Hi,

what is the best way to climb in 109F, Yak-3 and other good climbers (IAS and flap setting).

Does the settings depend if you are turning (spiral climb) or flying straight.

Thanks,

Juhani Sahlberg

WB:Cirrus

I'll just cover sustained climbs.

To maximize the sustained climb rate you need to fly wings level at maximum power. In trim of course.

A good way to set this is with the "climb autotrim" - A .speed 160 command (example for 160 MPH IAS climb) and shift-x to toggle on the climb autotrim.

You need to select the speed (and the resulting angle of climb) that maximizes the power you have left over after balancing the aerodynamic drag (excess power). The drag will be higher at higher speeds (takes more power to fly faster) and also higher at slow speeds (where the wing is near stalling.) The optimum is in the middle somewhere of these extremes.

The optimum climb speeds will be around 140 to 180 or so MPH IAS. The planes that generally fly faster should probably be climbed a bit faster. (I climb the ME-262 at around 280 MPH IAS).

The maximum climb rate will also be fairly flat over a fairly large speed range (see above). But if you are significantly too fast or too slow, you will see a definite reduction in the maximum climb rate.

The max climb rate is reduced with altitude as the power available from the engine drops also.

Flaps should be up (unused) for max climb rate - the wing alone has enough lift - the problem is getting that lift efficiently so as not to burn up the excess power through additional drag.

Flaps will cause too much drag to be optimum, for most if not all WB planes I suspect.

The maximum climb rates goes down directly with weight.

(That is, 10% extra weight, you get 90% of the climb rate.)

- Matt

Wb: =para=

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: There are some very important things to remember.

This can be difficult to explain, but here goes.

Okay, to *disengage* with a superior climb rate can sometimes be 'tricky'.

The thing to remember is that vertical separation given by a superior climb rate will often not get you out of gun range in time if you use a steep climb.

Say, for example, that you outclimb your opponent in a steep climb by 1000'/minute. Your opponent is d5 behind you, you are both between 325 and 330 MPH IAS (that's miles per hour of indicated airspeed). So you decide to use your 'superior climb rate' and zoom up and away from the bad guy. What usually happens is this - you zoom up, pulling back hard on the stick - and he zooms up behind you and shoots you to pieces.

Why does this happen? In very general non engineer type terms, the speed you lose going into that steep climb 'outweighs' the *vertical* distance you cover in the climb. You may all of a sudden be 900' (d3) higher, but you slow up so much entering that steep climb that your opponent, using a little more finesse on the stick, is actually closer to you than before - and then he shoots you down.

Remember that disparity in perceived range - a quick zoom of 1000' is *only* d3.3 range to your enemy.

So what can you do? You can climb smart - a famous LW pilot once said 'fly with your head, not your muscles'. This may be part of what he was talking about.

In an aircraft with good climb performance, the best way to separate from your opponent by using your climb rate is to use a very very shallow climb. Use some very slight 'jinks' to throw off enemy aim. What happens is this - your aircraft may lose 10 MPH IAS in a 500'/minute climb. The aircraft behind you (which is an inferior climber) will probably lose 20-25 MPH IAS in the same climb. Now if he stays in level flight, you are slowly climbing above him. But your speed is still high enough that he can not fly right up your tail and blast you to pieces.

When the Bf 109K-4 first came out in Warbirds, I did a lot of testing on it.

Some of the guys in my squadron were having a tough time surviving in it. It was fast, but when a Bf 109K-4 got in trouble, the 'pilot' would haul back on the stick to zoom upward, and usually get killed. So I came up with this 'axiom'...

"Nothing can catch a Bf 109K-4 at 350 MPH IAS in a 500'/minute climb."

...and what it basically means is that the way to escape in a Bf 109K-4 is to make it so you and your opponent wind up with a relatively safe degree of horizontal separation (say d10 or so) and at around the same speed. Then put your Bf 109K-4 in a 500'/minute climb.

You will usually (baring some hard to detect difference in energy state) 'leave him in the dust'. If you want to see it in action, email me and I'll meet you in the dueling arena to show you.

This works with *most* of the Bf 109 series against contemporary opponents.

If I would have remembered this on Friday, while flying in a Bf 109E-4 in a Scenario Lite versus Hurricane Is, I would probably have not been blown to pieces by =worr=. Well, I have re-learned the lesson for the next 6 months at least. 8)

I hope this helps.

See you up there,

Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14)

Newsgroups: warbirds.general

Subject: Here's what I think...

...about what those statements meant.

In WB, I *think* I have more Fw 190D-9 time than most. From the day it came out until the introduction of the RPS about 95% (literally) of my sorties were in the Fw 190D-9. Since the RPS, I get about 30% of my sorties in a Bf 109 but once the Fw 190D-9 is out that is almost all I fly.

Before the Fw 190D-9 was out, I used to fantasize on channel 100 about what it would be like if and when it was modeled - for everyone who had to put up with me, at least I was true to form when the aircraft was modeled. 8)

Okay, back to those statements. I think that 'turning' Fw 190s in WB is a great deal like turning P-51s and *maybe* P-47s. If you overdo things, or don't use the correct touch at the correct speed, the aircraft comes back and bites you in the form of a stall and spin or maybe a large loss of energy. What I am getting at is that someone who has flown these aircraft a great deal has a better idea of how to treat them at the edge of the envelope. I have seen this while lying WB - there are numerous times I have put my nose inside a Fw 190A-4 while flying a Fw 190D-9 to get the kill. The number of times I have seen a probable 'new guy' try to turn that Fw 190A-4 a little too tight, only to have it whipsaw back across my guns is even greater.

Is this only a matter of pilot skill? I don't *know*. As a 3rd year ME student, this is what I am thinking - the Fw 190D-9 has less weight in the wings and is a little lighter than the Fw 190A-8.

Now I have *heard* that WB does not model the affects of weight in the wing itself *yet* (I have also heard that this and some other great improvements are on the way). Also, raw HP matters in a turning engagement - you have more 'generated energy' to haul the nose around in that circle. So in my 'unofficial book', the Fw 190D-9 is the king of the 190s (yes, I am biased, but I am trying not to be) but only when it's flown by someone who has the hours in it to know why. It can outperform a Fw 190A-8 in everything but firepower and durability, and in my book with a great pilot in a Fw 190A-4 versus a great pilot in a Fw 190D-9 in a low tight angle engagement on the deck it would come down to pilot skill.

I think the 2 biggest reasons the Fw 190D-9 is not as popular with the majority of the 'die hard LW aircraft types' are these...

1. The adding of that 700 lbs. weight soured a lot of them. I and they know it was in the name of accuracy, but the shock is roughly equal to your dream girl saying "bye I have to go to work" about 4 minutes after the clothes come off at 12:20 AM Saturday morning.

2. Most guys didn't give it enough time.

The Fw 190D-9 does not fly like a fast Fw 190A with no wing guns and an inline engine. Handling wise it is almost an entirely different aircraft. I think alot of guys just went back to the Fw 190A when hit with the added weight on the Fw 190D-9 and the large differences.

There is nothing wrong with this at all in my opinion - fly what you like, no?

...also, for sheer death dealing, *especially* in the main arena but almost anywhere in general, the Fw 190A will always be a contender. 4 cannons and a radial engine (when considering the new engine damage modeling) are tough to beat. With most fights in the main arena taking place at 8,000' or lower, the Fw 190A is right at home.

Now as far as the official wartime test data when the British compared the Fw 190A-3 and the Spitfire VB, I think they tested both above and below 10,000'.

They tested as close to wartime 'settings' as they could. Most fights over the channel started between 15,000' and 20,000', and rarely got below 5,000'. So I think that even though the Fw 190A does lose some power at around 10,000', it should still dominate the Spitfire VB in the vertical at that altitude. Of course, the case is that PYRO probably has far better data than we do (that usually is the case) but I think it's a good thing that it is at least mentioned from the player's side that there are some strange semi-contradictions involving 'test' data and performance.

I've just started a foolishly detailed test program involving the Fw 190 and it's key opponents (i.e. I'll be testing the Japanese and USN/USMC aircraft last). Here is one easy thing that all of you can check yourselves in about 10 minutes...

1. Take a Fw 190A-4 with 100% fuel.

2. Set your 'air start altitude' to 100' (offline of course).

3. Hit 'fly'. Immediately go to 100% power + WEP and climb at the steepest angle you can. Time yourself to 10,000'.

4. Now repeat steps 1 thru 3 with the Spitfire VB.

...there will be a small variation in time because you are climbing at too steep an angle for the 'auto trim on angle' function to work. But at present it looks like the Spitfire VB is beating the Fw 190A-4 to 10,000' by about 15 seconds on average. I don't know if this is right or wrong - the Spitfire VB may carry less fuel and it is definitely a lighter aircraft in an unloaded state.

I've got a lot of testing (that's an understatement) left to do, and once it's done and HOOF or PYRO has the time to put in a few 'this is because of this' revelations/disclaimers, I'll put it out for general reading.

Please remember one important thing here - don't ever expect someone to be able to admit that their favorite aircraft can be beat by aircraft X. I'm not trying to say that with the Fw 190A versus the Fw 190D. In the end, I am a firm believer in the 'pilot skill matters the most' mantra. If you think you are beat on paper before the fight takes place, you are probably beat.

Remember when all those physicists proved on paper that it was physically impossible for a human being to run a mile in under 4 minutes? I don't think that runner took their reports to heart... 8)

See you guys up there,

Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14)

p.s. For any really new Fw 190 Psychos out there who read this, forget about turning in circles in a Fw 190. Stay fast, check your '6' (*especially* your low '6') alot, and *only turn in the horizontal if it will give you a killing shot on your target in less than 3 seconds*.

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: A way of "picturing" SA

The following explanation of SA was told to me by a squaddie a while ago and it coined perfectly the way I "see" SA and process what I see.

Imagine SA being 3 sphererical zones around your a/c, one bigger than the other.

The first zone, is fairly small, you could call it the ACM zone. It's the zone you use for the actual fight, where you observe & react to the enemy your fighting. This also include eventual friendlies or enemies that are directly involved. In WB terms, I would define it as being from d0 to d15-25

The second zone is somewhat bigger..I define it as the decision zone.

It's where you scan for threats/targets that you will have to take action against soon (whether that be defending/attacking/disengaging or just plain ignoring). This could be defined as being from d15-25 to d40-60.

The 3rd and outermost zone is the "observation" zone. This cover the area where you dont have to take any action, but you should keep an eye out for eventual bogies. This zone covers from d40-60+.

This way of splitting it up, helps a lot keeping count of bogies & friendlies.

Instead of trying to remember where each and everyone is, I go more ike:

I got 1 bogey in the ACM zone, 2 bogies & 3 friendlies in the decision zone and a couple of couple of bogies in the obs zone.(Note: I dont personally use those names...just the only way I could describe them).

The zones changes size depending on the conditions..obviously, with no-one in the ACM zone, I dont scan it. But I always scan the decision zone, even if I'm sure no-one is around...this is your best chance of discovering the unseen bouncer.

It also depends on what plane & at what alt I'm flying...up high, in a 51, the decision zone often extends out to d60+, as I'll try to plan my approach/attack the moment I get contact.Turnfighting in a spit, the ACM zone expands and the decision zone shrinks in, E-fighting in a 109, I only use the ACM zone for the actual gun passes and use the decision zone for setting up the attacks.

The way I scan the zones, also changes. In a turnfight my scanning ratio would be: 5-3-1 (5 times ACM zone, 3 times decision, 1 time in the obs).

In an E-fight, it changes to 1-6-2 ratio. Cruisin' at hi alt, it would be more like 0-3-3.

On good days, I can more or less get a "high" on SA. It's awesome..you will spot the bad guys way before they see you and you'll anticipate their every move.

Good SA makes things like ACM and planetypes less important.

my .02

Daff

Screamin' Blue Messiahs

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: "About dem warp rolls..." 8)

Almost any fighter currently modeled in Warbirds can be made to 'warp'. There are several ways to do this, but I'm not going to comment on each one - the last thing the Warbirds community needs is a lesson on how to warp roll, no? 8)

Generally speaking, some pilots will use violent and random stick/rudder input in an attempt to make their aircraft 'warp' when they think/know their Goose is Cooked.

Now normally, this will almost never save them. They bleed away large ammounts of speed/energy when they pull these 'tricks'. A cool headed cool handed pilot on their '6' will just bide his time, going slightly vertical to build up some energy while Wild Bill Kelso plays Star Trek down below.

Eventually, the 'expert' who is 'evading gunfire' so well will lose so much speed that his 'evasives'/'warps' don't move him far enough to avoid being shot.

But where this can really be cheesy/annoying/etc. is when someone has a wingman or friendlies nearby. At this point, intentionally 'warping' (in an effort to buy a few seconds a wingman to come save your butt) is maybe the thing I look down upon the most in Warbirds. I was in the HA a couple of weeks ago, in a Bf 109E-4. A pretty good 'stick' (whom I previously thought much more off) was in a Spitfire IA. I slid onto his '6', and he began intentionally 'warping', as he scampered home across the channel. I guess on one level, it is just a game.

What is 1 kill out of the 375,000 you will score over time as you play Warbirds? But I will tell you one thing.

In my eyes, people who 'game the FE' and such are definitely on a distinct and lower level than most of the guys I respect in the Warbirds community. I won't ever 'flame' the 'warp ACM experts', but I won't ever really respect their ability or consider them an equal either. Someone might reply "So what?", but I enjoy talking tactics, opinions, whatever with a good Warbirds player a great deal. After 3.5 years in the main arena, comparing notes is often more enjoyable than any given Monday night in the main arena.

As far as people thinking you are 'warp rolling', don't sweat it too much. An experienced Warbirds player can usually tell if 'warping' is caused by a panicked new guy or another experienced Warbirds player who is using a glitch in the communications code to gain an advantage. A good guideline - fly like you are flying an aircraft.

And remember, the only ways to really survive having someone on your '6'...

1. Force an overshoot (either thru speed differential or superior maneuver on your part).

2. Gain separation to beyond accurate gun range (thru speed or superior energy state).

3. Have your wingman kill the S.O.B. 8)

...usually don't go along well with induced 'warps'. Some might argue that #3 does, but a good 'drag' on your part allows your wingman to clear you and not get dangerously low and slow in the process.

See you up there,

Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14)

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: Actually...

...we are saying the same thing here. A 'lazy barrel roll' will often cause a faster moving pursuer to overshoot (as in #1 on my list of 3 posted above).

Personally, I don't consider a deliberately executed barrel roll to be an 'induced warp' type thing.

If anyone is having a tough time blasting someone using 'lazy barrel rolls', remember this - fly 3-5 seconds ahead of the enemy. When you see him start that barrel roll, don't bite. Keep yourself in near level flight and keep your speed up. Often times, as the enemy completes his barrel roll, you'll be waiting at close range - wings level, high speed, waiting for the shot. In my experience, it only takes a little tiny bit of stick and rudder input to line up and zap the bad guy as he completes 1 barrel roll and begins another.

One option here (if it is okay to get slow at the time you are chasing the barrel rolling enemy) - when the enemy begins a barrel roll, stay in level flight and cut your power to roughly 75%. You get the same situation as above, but without as much closure. In other words, you get 2, maybe 3 decent shots as you close in. But when you are getting really close, go back to 100% power + WEP, take that last shot, and remember to not give the enemy a decent shot due to a bad maneuver/overshoot on your part.

See you guys up there,

Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14)

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: Re: Actually...

As a WB dweeb, I've been reading this thread with great interest as I've never heard of warp rolling in my time in AW. One thing I haven't seen anybody mention, however, is doing these barrel rolls with -G and perhaps opposite rudder. Mixing this, of course, with +G barrel rolls as oil and blood pressure require, but mostly staying negative. This is a fairly common evasive move in AW and I've seen it a lot (and used it some) in WB already.

Going with -G (and maybe opposite rudder) is more deceptive than purely evasive. You generally can't push as many -Gs as you can pull +G so your barrel diameter is much smaller, maybe even less than your wingspan. Thus, you're not really dodging. But if the nme tries to pull lead on you like you're pulling +Gs, he'll shoot right over your head as you fade away in the other direction. Using the rudder to skew your fuselage a bit adds to this effect. If the nme doesn't catch onto what you're doing, you can carry on doing this for a very long time and you don't lose much speed doing it. In fact, you can still accelerate well if you do this diving so it helps you extend your E-fighter from a stallfighter on your butt.

There's a problem with doing this in WB, however, that doesn't happen in AW. This is that the WB FE sometimes _greatly_ exaggerates the nose down angle in the -G rolling. Thus, the pursuer sees what looks like a 45^ low 6 view of the target pivoting madly about a point near one of its wingtips. It almost looks to be tumbling end over end while still maintaining a high forward speed. Thus, its mostly just confusing instead of sneaky deceptive. Still friggin' hard to hit if you don't know what the guy's doing. But I can really see how some folks would call it warping.

-Bullethead

Newsgroups: warbirds.training

Subject: There are a great deal of variables here...

...so it's kind of a multiple answer type question.

First of all, no snapshot is a bad snapshot if you are a good shot. 8) If you are deadly accurate, and you have a snapshot that does not put you at risk in the form of a collision or an enemy's massive firepower (Fw 190A, F4U-4B, Hurricane IIC, Bf 110, etc.) then by all means take it. Hits on the target are hits on the target. One notable exception is if you believe your opponent has not seen you. In this case, you may want to hold off on a snapshot if you believe you can 'sneak' into a position for a high % gun solution - say you try to execute a lead turn onto an opponent's '6' from his low '3'. You don't execute the lead turn so well. You do have a snapshot, but it is a tough (low %) one. Often times you will be better off 'ducking back down' and circling for a nice close low '6' sneak attack. Never assume your enemy knows you are there. You would be surprised at how many times someone is saved by errant tracers in the main arena - an enemy may know he is in danger, but he might not know that *you* are the real threat. While he is busy tracking the 3 high enemy aircraft on his high '6', he might never see you coming in from his low '3'.

As far as the "Should I stay and follow or snapshoot and go" question, there are something like 2.982 Gazillion variables (and that's alot of variables!).

Basically, you need to know if you can stay on your enemy's '6'. If you are a P-47D fighting an A6M3, a snapshot followed by some kind of zooming vertical disengagement is probably just fine as far as choices go. In the end, you have to make that decision based on what the variables are each and every time the option comes up. Knowing your aircraft (and your opponent's aircraft) inside and out help. Having good situational awareness helps a great deal. Both of these things come the hard way - with experience. But here are a few guidelines that might help...

1. In the main arena, only enter a horizontal turning engagement if you know it will take you 5 seconds or less to get a gun solution and shoot down the bad guy. This applies to everyone. A large % of the A6Ms killed by Fw 190s, P-51s, P-47s, etc. get killed because they get too wrapped up in a wicked 'knife fight' at 120 MPH IAS.

2. Provided you are not in danger of giving your opponent a snapshot as you 'overshoot', it never hurts to go vertical in a 1 on 1 situation where you are on your opponent's '6' with more energy. If you have doubts about being able to knock him down due to his evasives, zoom a little (as in climb), keep your eyes on your opponent, and set up another gun pass. Patience is rarely a bad thing, especially in a 1 on 1 situation. But don't play with your food - set him up and shoot him down without wasting any time.

3. Any aircraft can out turn any other aircraft in Warbirds at any speed *long enough to score killing hits with guns*. Take a piece of paper. Draw one large circle. Now draw a smaller circle that intersects the larger circle at 2 points...

large circle - P-47D turning radius

small circle - A6M3 turning radius

the 2 points where the circles intersect - point where the P-47D will have a chance of a high % gun solution on the A6M3 if he eats his carrots and flies smart

...in other words, you don't have to out turn an enemy aircraft in a 360 degree

circle to get a killing shot on him. You just have to out turn him for about 1.5 seconds at the right time. You can follow him on his '6' for a shot, or you can use a snapshot, or you can fly 5 seconds ahead of him and when he reverses in that rolling scissors, you can be waiting...fingers on the firing buttons...as he crosses your guns at d2 like a big skeet pigeon. 8)

...one thing you should do (if you haven't done it already) - print out a copy of the article on 'energy fighting' at:

http://members.home.com/mefletcher/acm.html

and read it a few times. Learn it. Live it. Wear Silk Shirts - you can't be cool if you don't have a Silk Shirt, right? 8)

Seriously - having an in depth and working knolwedge of energy fighting/tactics is basically the answer to about 1/3 of the questions about tactics, ACM, etc. in Warbirds that you see on this newsgroup or in the main arena.

See you up there,

Mike ('wulfie', 2./JG 14)