Quote:


Yeah, if  I remeber correctly, the Pogo project was abandoned mainly because flying it boarded on suicidal, particulatly the landings.  

Quote:


The ACES team surprised everybody when they:

1. Announced the release of the demo.

2. Mentioned that they will release the beta [which is different from the demo].

3. Were allowed to post the progress of FSX in their own personal blogs.

4. When they allowed more people [particularly the press like AvSim] than usual to test out product.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they are hiding something that will make us all jump with joy at the last moment.

What is it with you guys and thrust vectoring ???

Besides, this is meant as a genuine observation but have you noticed MS sims do seem to conveniently forget British aircraft. VTOL being one of ours

This trend was also noticed in CFS3 where, there is no Meteor despite it's active service during WWII.

Strangely a P80 was put in, although it saw no service in WWII.

Conversely a number of German aircraft were included which never even flew.

In-fact the entire sim was dated 1943 on, which is why you don't get a MkI Spitfire.

So, basically unless it's something which the mass U.S. market identifies with, it won't be included. Which is also why you guys don't get thrust vectoring, because it is always associated with the Harrier.

If it was down to me I'd give you thrust vector tomorrow, complain to MS.

Jasper

Quote:

Possible AND ridiculous. This gauge is nice but it's not real VTOL at all.

This pogo is perfectly real vtol because its forward movement is up, so fs doesn't care. the plane goes straight up with enough throttle.

Quote:


I feel I should point out one or two facts on this:

The Meteor DID see action in WWII over occupied teritory, Holland to be exact.

In  duel against a 262, the Meteor would have been the victor without question. This is generally recognised as factual by many experts and for these reasons- Firstly, the 262 could not be flown in quite the same way by an enormous margin by virtue of the fact that axial flow turbines were still in their infancy. The 262 engine was seriously prone to cavitation in the inter stages. It was also seriously prone to bursting. The requirement to obtain power from the 262 engines very gently, and very slowly was a serious handicap. German pilots by this time were much below par.

The Whittle engine on the other hand was far more superior in terms of reliability and strength. Power availability by comparison was instantaneous.

The 262's engine weakness was known and it certainly was recognised at the time that it could even be possible to down one without firing a shot. Just force a flame-out.

Most agree that German 'AXIAL' turbine technology was ahead of it's time, but then they didn't do much with centrifugal compressors either. If they had followed the same principles as Whittle the story might have been different since the Whittle engine was far simpler to manufacture and was an infinately better engine in service.

The 20 hour service life of the German engine really settles the argument of who had the better technology. Maybe also remember the whittle engine produced a third more thrust.

262's were generally destroyed on the ground, crashed because of cavitation induced flame outs, and even mid air engine explosions.

I am of the view (as are many others) that in a dogfight with something of a similar speed capability a 262 simply wouldn't be responsive enough or even safe ! Mustang's could, and did get them.

I think I am correct in the belief that three P80's went to italy, but saw no combat because one or two got damaged, another totally destroyed. Something along those lines but basically none flew.

You have Mr Tucker Hatfield to thank for the rather biassed and twisted portrayal of historical facts. His unbelievable explanations for the CFS3 line-up can still be found on the net.

Jasper