Found a report about the A6M3: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/hamp-eb201.html Power off, flaps and gear down: Gross weight: 2647 kg (5835 lbs.) Wing area: 21.53 m^2 Indicated stall speed: 116 km/h (72 MPH) Cl Max: 1.94 FH 1.68 value: 1.5 Warbirds 2.77 value: 1.99 Power off, flaps and gear up: Gross weight: 2647 kg (5835 lbs.) Wing area: 21.53 m^2 Indicated stall speed: 122 km/h (76 MPH) Cl Max: 1.74 FH 1.68 value: 1.29 Warbirds 2.77 value: 1.72 Note the amazing correspondence to 2.77 values! I suppose this report isn't Russian , but it's the best I've found. You can use IAS for sea level stall speed, by the way, because the indicated airspeed at stall does not change with altitude for a fixed configuration. I suppose you can argue P's and Q's regarding expended fuel weight, but that's not constructive. It really is time to hear an "official" response. There are hundreds of Russian posts in the general forum that look like honest debate about the recent version, but I haven't seen anything as extensive regarding stall speeds/lift coefficients as I have posted here. What gives?
Check-out some of the flap details in this story: http://www.warmkessel.com/jr/flying/td/jd/71.jsp very interesting. Also this is a very good read, copy of the US gov tests of the zero: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Informational_Intelligence_Summary_No._85
I just played few sorties in old wb 2.77 offline.. What to say , difference is huuuugeee... First of all , P38 is much easier plane to fly there, almost extreme easy , but it actually responds to joystick inputs Great elevator response... Ki43 is... better turner than our I15 I would say . It just turns like crazy. And our Kikimor 43? Cant even outturn zero ...Shame.. Zero also "feels" much better than ours... Fw 190 turns good... I should stop here , before i get myself angry Would really like to know what data old IEN used for setting up.. Without accusing anyone , I must say we lost many planes comparing to old IEn... Would be interesting to find out what happened to them, according to what data , why they are worse now...Im affraid they got worse for some new planes to appear, and must say that is not good...
I'm not so sure that planes were made worse so that new planes could appear. I think that someone, in the long long ago, was trying to please a certain community within FH with regard to "historic kill ratios" of plane X vs plane Y. Instead of telling that particular group to get some more skill, they started messing with the plane set in order to make it easier for plane X to kill plane Y. Then the mass exodus occurred. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.
I have no problem with that , as long as I can see according to what data , planes were changed. Ill do some search on forum and try to find what happened to some planes, because if we need real data now in order to change , real data must have been used in the past as well..or not...
I'm going with or not for some/most of the changes. Some things were either unforeseen changes in code due to adjustments made with other things. Some changes were due to incredible amount of whining. Other changes are just for the hell of it IMHO.
The problem with historic kill ratios is that it has a lot less to do with plane quality than it does tactics, training, and size of force.
