You literally said it here.
Yes, I’m making fun of the fact that you, who edited a post FOUR TIMES to completely change what it said, are doing exactly that.
Guys, stay on topic.
My post didn’t change meaning either.
All the edits:
I make more typing errors when on my laptop, thus I had a lot of mistakes to fix.
Pretty big claim that is now NOWHERE to be found.
1 Like
You mean an off-topic post that I deleted due to being off-topic?
Yet you didn’t delete yours yet?
Lord forbid I police myself and keep things on-topic…
It was on-topic, since you claimed his test wasn’t accurate. It’s a fair claim to make if you had any basis for it, but you didn’t post any data or sources whatsoever - only now after multiple edits and being called out.
This conversation only went offtopic because of your dishonesty.
Oh shit! Bro’s climbin at 2km/s!!1!
1 Like
My bad, lmao. I’ll correct it right away.
4 Likes
Spitfire is REALLY overperforming now, at this rate it’ll beat the MiG-25RB
2 Likes
@PercussionCap Sincerity and honesty is not dishonest no matter how much your post claims.
This is what I said, cause I doubted the claims as his post provided no screenshots nor video of the test.
Claims without evidence.
I just wanted to see the evidence for myself so I can know to support the cause.
Careful, someone will post and call you dishonest for correcting it. ;)
Thank you for being vigilant and always edit your posts when spotting errors.
Nothing is more sincere and honest than editing a post.
1 Like
This even reached the point where deleted replies means Tables man now has two consecutive replies, one of which leads to nowhere if you click the button to see what he’s replying to.
edit: thanks to forum, the scrolling screenshot above is fucked. This one isn’t:
I didn’t see this post earlier.
Thank you for this, Flip.
Sadly PercussionCap’s posts are attempting to derail this topic.
At least yourself, Blitz, and I are in agreement on this issue at this stage in the topic.
Though later you did have posts saying I was wrong for acknowledging the fact Spitfire is overperforming.
I hope we can get passed that.
Simply making everyone here see why the previous exchange appears so weird, as if me and Flip are responding to entirely different messages, some of which are now deleted.
2 Likes
Hahaha, sry man but smn wasnt adding up
1 Like
No-one is wrong. The plane is overperforming no matter what fuel load you consider. The sources indicates the irl spit weighed 3281kg. If a 3288kg spit (25mins of fuel in game) performs demostrably better than a 3281kg spit, the point is made.
No need to split hairs with the weight or fuel minutes etc.
3 Likes
Apologies for the drama in here.
I made some typing mistakes and they honed in on them.
My reflexes typed up something while I was watching a film at some point and I deleted that off-topic post cause my brain was wandering for that post.
I came here on a fact-finding mission and to see if I could support this cause, and I mistyped many things.
My bad.
2 Likes
No need to apologise. Matters such as this naturally attract drama, no hard feelings
1 Like
I can confirm that I tested the climb with 0% radiators. This is why I took time finding a source that explicitly stated the irl aircraft had shut rads
2 Likes
That’s good to know, but even IF you had your radiators open, this would still mean the LF Mk IX was overperforming as your climb would be worse with them open.
I’ve had suspicions that the Spitfires were overperforming before, and this might apply to other models as well.
4 Likes