[Hairog]

You can explore all these matchups in my Mega campaign of World War Three 1946. I've developed a storyline that diverges from history when Stalin attacks in May of 1946. It's based on the actual plans of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that were developed in 1946-1948. They fully expected an attack by the USSR in 1946.

I've streched the truth just a little bit and integrated all the German Wonder Weapons and weird planes from IL2 1946.



So far there are 3 mini campaigns available.

US Fighter Pilot Campaign ... http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?n...ls&id=3857



Soviet Fighter Pilot Campaign ... http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?n...ls&id=3913



Soviet Interceptor Pilot Campaign ... http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?n...ls&id=3980

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Like comparing P-51D-25 (IL2) Vs. P-51D-30 (real) like you did.

Yes just like the FACTS I used when comparing P-51D-25 (IL2) Vs. P-51D-30 (real) like I did.

Or like comparing a Mclaren from the beginning of the current F1 season with the one they have now. Same model, yes, but diferent details.

Ah..?

Ya lost me there

Ahahah, i see you'll never understand.

Which in this case says more about the teacher than the student

[RedChico]

And whats that supose to mean?

You did compared the IL2 "25" against a real "30" and then you presented us with an "error" versus reality.... a 25 against a 30?

As i said its comparing a Maclaren from the beginning of the present season against the latest they have now... but its cleary you don't understand that.

About "similar" wings... same thickness, same area, same chord.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

RedChico
And whats that supose to mean?

It means the problem is with the teacher not the student, as in the student is capable of learning, but the teacher can not teach

RedChico
You did compared the IL2 "25" against a real "30" and then you presented us with an "error" versus reality.... a 25 against a 30?

Nope I did not do that

RedChico
As i said its comparing a Maclaren from the beginning of the present season against the latest they have now... but its cleary you don't understand that.

Ah..

You lost me there.. still

See this is the part I was referring to about the teacher vs student

I (the student) told you before I don't know what you are (the teacher) referring to with this Maclaren reference

At which point the you had the opportunity to explain yourself better (be the teacher)

But instead you choose to imply that 'I will never understand'

And I never will until you explain yourself better

Hence the student vs. teacher reference

RedChico
About "similar" wings... same thickness, same area, same chord.

Ok thanks

[RedChico]

Nope I did not do that

Correct, its was real P-51B against IL2 P-51D-25, even worse.

Went back to your thread and I see you managed to edited you work with "calculated" P-51D, with no explanation how you calculated it.

You lost me there.. still

See this is the part I was referring to about the teacher vs student

I (the student) told you before I don't know what you are (the teacher) referring to with this Maclaren reference

At which point the you had the opportunity to explain yourself better (be the teacher)

But instead you choose to imply that 'I will never understand'

And I never will until you explain yourself better

Hence the student vs. teacher reference

I already did, you just looping around it and you keep posting like that just to make belive that you're right.
Its impossible to have a discussion with you because you keep looping around and around so that you're always right and everyone else is wrong.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Nope I did not do that

Correct, its was real P-51B against IL2 P-51D-25, even worse.

Went back to your thread and I see you managed to edited you work with "calculated" P-51D, with no explanation how you calculated it.

So let me see if I understand what your saying..

You admit your 'memory' was in error wrt the 25 vs. 30

And now your trying to imply that I edited my works since the last time you looked at it becuase it does not look the way you 'remember' it

You lost me there.. still

See this is the part I was referring to about the teacher vs student

I (the student) told you before I don't know what you are (the teacher) referring to with this Maclaren reference

At which point the you had the opportunity to explain yourself better (be the teacher)

But instead you choose to imply that 'I will never understand'

And I never will until you explain yourself better

Hence the student vs. teacher reference

I already did, you just looping around it and you keep posting like that just to make belive that you're right.

Really?

Care to 'quote' the part that you consider where you claim to have explaned this

Because honestly I don't see it

Its impossible to have a discussion with you because you keep looping around and around so that you're always right and everyone else is wrong.

Well I am big enough to admit when I made a mistake

So here is your chance..

Prove me wrong and quote where you said you explane who and what this 'Maclaren' reference is about

Untill than IMHO your the one looping around

[RedChico]

You still looping around the same crap like a bad record player.
At least you're consistant.
I also like the cunning way you ofend ppl inbetween the lines, nice work.

The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

The "25" and "30" case, i did it on purpose, and boy you're quite predictable.
Anyone can check the edit dates, the responses (not only my but by others too) to your initial work and your last post.
Perhaps it was magic that calculated the p-51D data, as you don't even say what you did to get those "calculated" values.
As i said in that thread if you don't have real data to compare it, don't compare.

Loopy loop. :mrgreen:

[ACE-OF-ACES]

You still looping around the same crap like a bad record player.
At least you're consistant.
I also like the cunning way you ofend ppl inbetween the lines, nice work.

The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

The "25" and "30" case, i did it on purpose, and boy you're quite predictable.
Anyone can check the edit dates, the responses (not only my but by others too) to your initial work and your last post.
Perhaps it was magic that calculated the p-51D data, as you don't even say what you did to get those "calculated" values.
As i said in that thread if you don't have real data to compare it, don't compare.

Loopy loop. :mrgreen:

So you refuse to provide a quote of where you think you explained it already?

Or are you just purposely avoiding doing so because you know you didn't and any attempt by you to fake it would only highlight the fact that you didn't

I am sure it is the latter

But here is your chance to prove me wrong

Provide the quote

Or bow out of this thread because you weak attempt to turn this into a flame fest is not working

Thanks!

[RedChico]

You still looping around the same crap like a bad record player.
At least you're consistant.
I also like the cunning way you ofend ppl inbetween the lines, nice work.

The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

The "25" and "30" case, i did it on purpose, and boy you're quite predictable.
Anyone can check the edit dates, the responses (not only my but by others too) to your initial work and your last post.
Perhaps it was magic that calculated the p-51D data, as you don't even say what you did to get those "calculated" values.
As i said in that thread if you don't have real data to compare it, don't compare.

Loopy loop. :mrgreen:

So you refuse to provide a quote of where you think you explained it already?

Or are you just purposely avoiding doing so because you know you didn't and any attempt by you to fake it would only highlight the fact that you didn't

I am sure it is the latter

But here is your chance to prove me wrong

Provide the quote

Or bow out of this thread because you weak attempt to turn this into a flame fest is not working

Thanks!

Still looping around.
The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Still looping around.
The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

So you refuse to provide a quote of where you think you explained it already?

Or are you just purposely avoiding doing so because you know you didn't and any attempt by you to fake it would only highlight the fact that you didn't

I am sure it is the latter

But here is your chance to prove me wrong

Provide the quote

Or bow out of this thread because you weak attempt to turn this into a flame fest is not working

Thanks!

[tracyk859]

Thanks for the post.
Hi guys, Im a newbie. Nice to join this forum.




__________________
watch tangled online free

[Fireskull]

Thanks for the post.
Hi guys, Im a newbie. Nice to join this forum.




__________________
watch tangled online free

Tracy, welcome to our community.




Fireskull

[RedChico]

Still looping around.
The Maclaren example you can figure it out because i know you're smart.

So you refuse to provide a quote of where you think you explained it already?

Or are you just purposely avoiding doing so because you know you didn't and any attempt by you to fake it would only highlight the fact that you didn't

I am sure it is the latter

But here is your chance to prove me wrong

Provide the quote

Or bow out of this thread because you weak attempt to turn this into a flame fest is not working

Thanks!

Not avoiding anything, you the one avoiding it by saying things like this:
"But here is your chance to prove me wrong"

Like you some kind of saint.

My inicial Formula 1 reference/comparison was quite clear.

The Fact that you were baited by Cnopicilin and you still loop around useless parts of discussions, cause the initial question on this thread was already responded, proves his point.

So you keep looping around your suposed flame war.

Thank you.

[RadPig94]

No Mig 9 fought against Me 262's in WW2.
Despite that if you look at the wings of each airplane, they will give you a clue, diferent types of wings will behave diferently in a dogfight.

Check this wiki page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_configuration


EDIT: and look at the weights of both airplanes.

thanks for the link, the article has interesting details and has links to interesting examples such as Caproni Ca.60

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Not avoiding anything, you the one avoiding it by saying things like this:
"But here is your chance to prove me wrong"

Like you some kind of saint.

My inicial Formula 1 reference/comparison was quite clear.

The Fact that you were baited by Cnopicilin and you still loop around useless parts of discussions, cause the initial question on this thread was already responded, proves his point.

So you keep looping around your suposed flame war.

Thank you.

So you refuse to provide a quote of where you think you explained it already?

Or are you just purposely avoiding doing so because you know you didn't and any attempt by you to fake it would only highlight the fact that you didn't

I am sure it is the latter

But here is your chance to prove me wrong

Provide the quote

Or bow out of this thread because you weak attempt to turn this into a flame fest is not working

Thanks!