It was irrelevant to the premise of the conversation. Its not easy to use supermaneuvrability in game nor is there a one button solution.
Additionally, aircraft overperform in game completely beyond reality. The only thing that is actually held back within the bounds of reality is Supermaneuvrability.
The speeds they are limited & consistent while aircraft like the F-16 can hit 15+ G at above Mach. Not that I disagree with the FM of the F-16… My point is that the ability to “cobra” is more realistically modelled than the entire flight envelope of the F-16 in WT.
Anything else you would like to add? Being as I am the only thing that summons your interest in the Su-27?
I am explaining to you what the U.S. was training for at the time. You ignoring the practiced doctrine is not my problem. I am not giving excuses for the U.S. not being able to use nukes, their doctrine at that time was terrible and reflected as such during that war.
No? Both nations didn’t even struggle militarily in Afghanistan. Both nations failed to coerce the people there to accept new rule.
The U.S. would have if President Truman did not tell MacArthur no. I’m suprised you didn’t acknowledge this when making this statement.
Are you actually aware of historical events or are you telling me to go read a book so I shut up?
Which is true, the U.S. trained for a mostly nuclear war. Being forced to use conventional tactics showed how unprepared they were. I don’t see what’s difficult to comprehend about this.
Not during the 60-70s. The focus was on bombers being the deciding factor, fighters were secondary. The approach to Vietnam was to bomb it into submission, in which nearly all campaigns failed, no less to which because of the massive restrictions placed upon targets such as airfields. It took the actions and deception of one Robert Olds to find a loophole to actually destroy the Vietcong Air Force. The whole air campaign outside of Operation Bolo was a disaster. The service branches did not cooperate at all, everything was linear, the approaches were all the same. The U.S. was absolutely not prepared for a conventional war, they promptly changed their focuse after the fact.
Cool. For the ground war. As was stated before. By me. The air war was conventional, fought with conventional weapons.
So are you saying since we used conventional weapons we were in a conventional war? Whoopsies.
Based on what you talk about, this specific conversation is well beyond what you understand and what you think you understand. I will not be gaslit from someone that is not able to comprehend the actual factors behind successes and failures of past military tactics.
By the way, if you want to continue, take this portion of it to DMs since this is not on topic anymore.
You are coping instead of taking the L and learning something new.
The US fought a conventional war in an Asymmetrical conflict & lost. This is true in Afghanistan for the USSR & the US.
It’s how the US won its own independence.
Do you have any idea how many bombs were dropped in Vietnam?
7,662,000 tons
That is a lot of conventional warfare brought upon the NVA. Don’t you think?
Look, you seem like an intelligent cat, & I understand you like conversing with me, I likewise. However, the more you become prideful in your initial conclusions & unwilling to receive correction, the more you will limit yourself on your ability to learn.
Correct a wise man, & he will still be wise. Only fools despise correction.
Only fools go out of their way to avoid being incorrect.
Now please, we have deviated from the Su-27 once again. Please keep it on my favorite aircraft. @BBCRF has provided some doctrine I knew he had but rarely shares to the general public :).
You have any questions direct them at him please.
Because some believe that the Su-27 & its supermaneuvrability is not needed & dogfighting is not relevant today.
This is false & why 5th generation air superiority fighters are equipped today.
It is current combat doctrine of the 3 superpowers that dogfighting will be relevant now & in the future. I highlighted previous conflicts which superpowers made the mistake of thinking that technology can remove all aspects of aerial combat.
Vietnam was one of several mentioned as it is the textbook example that the US Airforce highlights themselves as number one reason why dogfighting is certainly not dead & why they practice BFM extensively. Others felt a need to delve into the war itself.
However, topic deviation is a natural phenomenon that eventually happens in any conversation or debate in real life. As long all parties realize deviation has occurred & return to the subject at hand, there is no harm in it.
Thank you for realizing too :)
I have already written what was needed, no need to repeat myself. You can try it in DCS or SIM here on WT if it’s good. It may work for you sometimes, mostly 1 vs 1. Try it and see.
No, just keep trying and you’ll see, you don’t have to write another XYZ pages. Try, try, try, do some DCS ( I recommend it) to validate your ideas. It’s the only way.
It’s not easy bro, even for someone who is insanely experienced in top tier aviation like myself :)
War Thunder has not been developed or optimized for real aerodynamic techniques that utilize angles of attack beyond maximum lift.
Neither has War Thunder & its instructor been optimized whatsoever for controlled side slipping…
See what I did just there, I defined supermaneuvrability ;)
These are new game mechanics & capabilities in a game that was built around WWII piston driven fighters.
It was not created perfect day one for Supermaneuvrability & still is a work in progress.
You seem to like evoking the name of the Holy Roman Empire.
Maybe you can understand this: Rome was not built in a day, neither is the ability to execute supermaneuverable tactics in War Thunder.
Maybe there are some basic things simulated in the sim ?? From my experience I recommend rather DCS, I don’t know how SIM is in WT. In any other mode it makes no sense…
It can only be executed in full real & there are issues with it. It’s actually easier in Sim than Air RB because I cannot use my track IR with the R-73 in air RB third person, only first.
If it is enabled for third person, its game over. I just dump my speed, look at you & your dead.
GJ is actually protecting you from the Flanker’s specialized capabilities. You guys should be thanking developers that Ziggy cannot use his track IR in Air RB & must switch back and forth between full real controls to unlock the Flanker’s full flight envelope.
There are needed improvements I cannot even begin to describe or discuss with Flanker fans without getting jumped by 60 Ameriboos who swear to heaven & earth that it is a useless tactic & that some dedicated strike aircraft that is not even worthy of a full fighter (F) designation is somehow magically better.
Now I understand why @BBCRF & @Malekitth see total issues in the Su-27 flight model.
It is a fighter that can move in ways beyond what the F-16, F-15 & F/A-18 can ever dream. Only 5th generation fighters can move to the same beat as the Flanker in this specialized aerodynamic regime
called Dynamic Attainment.
Because the update was out for less that 5 hours when I made the observation & a need for 1-2 minutes of fuel can be attributed to many potential elements.
Not just an engines consumption or a fuel tank’s ability to store fuel. You do not even have the Su-27SM & never flown it into battle…
Thank you once again, for no relevant information & highlighting that you are oblivious even though you act like some sort of pseudo game developer & part time Skunk Works test pilot.
Btw I do not care what you pretend to be. Live action role play is super cool & can be fun, I agree. But before you do, at least know what the mechanical force of Lift is and not refuse to define it or any other terms involving flight. If you do not know, just say so.
Thank you.
Nah for real, bro it’s a pain trying to use it in game. Plus, I cannot use track IR for real HMS gameplay in Air RB.
Additionally, sometimes when you switch to full real controls the HMD does not work at all but stays fixed center screen like regular ACM modes or off in some random position.
You must switch back to regular controls & change the radar mode to fix it. If you prime the missile before entering full real, it seems to mess it up too. I am working on isolating what the issue is exactly & will report it when I do.
So, to your point. I hate to disagree with you, but you’re not seeing the overall difficulties to using supermaneuverable techniques in game. You are only seeing its difficulties & limitations from an IRL perspective.
Once it has been modelled fully as an actual feature in game (if ever). Then the question of it’s usefulness in WT can be argued to the ends of the world. We are barely in the first stages of this capability which begins with the Su-27S.
We will get the Terminator and others. They will come to the game. Mark my word. GJ will have to increase its supermaneuvrability to be far more controllable in-game for these aircraft.
PS. To all the people who swear supermaneuvrability is a useless gimmick & cannot be used offensively. You will eat your own words when the Su-37 & Su-35 comes to the game.
You only remember what’s convenient. I wrote that supermaneuverability is more associated with the Su 35/57…than the Su 27…and that it is not practical to talk about it until 2010 ±…