PDA

View Full Version : Slow Aircaft Rules (without special cards needed)



Zoe Brain
09-20-2014, 01:34
There are now a good-sized number of popular (and not-so-popular) aircraft available in 1/200 that are just too slow for the WGS rules system to cater for. Anything slower than 300 km/h.

That includes such must-have aircraft such as:

Ju52 - speed fast 270 kmh, slow 220 kmh.
PBY Catalina - fast 310 kmh, slow 200 kmh
LI2/DC3 - fast 300kmh, slow 245 kmh
Stringbag - fast 230 kmh, slow 155 kmh

As well as a few others
Vildebeest - fast 230 kmh, slow 160 kmh
Po2 -fast 152 kmh, slow 110 kmh

There have been a number of good proposals for dealing with one or another aircraft, but they all require special decks and exception to the normal rules.

This proposal still requires new game mechanics - there's no way around that since we don't have negative-length cards (!). But it does not require new maneuver decks. Existing decks are just used in a (slightly) different way. Moreover, the method caters for all aircraft, no matter how slow they are.

You place the card OVER the stand so the rear of the card abuts the peg, then with one finger on the card to steady it, move the stand so the peg (not the edge) of the card covers the arrow. No having to slide cards under stands, or at least, no worse than now. See below for a cutaway diagram illustrating the principle.

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=144074&d=1411132620



By using existing decks, just removing inappropriate cards (45 degree turns, reversals, sideslips) all the different aircraft, popular like the PBY or oddball like the Vickers Vildebeest can be catered for.

PBY - G deck
Li2/DC3 - M deck
Ju52 - N deck
Swordfish - C deck
Vildebeest - C deck
Po2 - J deck
B10 - G deck

Пилот
09-21-2014, 00:22
I can't see the picture, but, if I got it right:

1. Rear of the maneuver card touches the peg (card over the base)
2. Peg touches the arrow (base over the card)

so plane moves only the portion of way?

flash
09-21-2014, 01:31
Neat solution Zoe, that should get a few more kites into the fray. :thumbsup:

grumpybear
09-21-2014, 05:38
I can't see the picture, but, if I got it right:

1. Rear of the maneuver card touches the peg (card over the base)
2. Peg touches the arrow (base over the card)

so plane moves only the portion of way?

Thank you for the info Zoe.

Jager
09-21-2014, 07:22
Will this method supersede the Z decks you made?
Karl

Naharaht
09-21-2014, 15:01
Once again you have come up with a good idea, Zoe! :thumbsup:

Zoe Brain
09-21-2014, 16:48
I can't see the picture, but, if I got it right:

1. Rear of the maneuver card touches the peg (card over the base)
2. Peg touches the arrow (base over the card)

so plane moves only the portion of way?

Exactly correct, yes.

Zoe Brain
09-21-2014, 16:51
Will this method supersede the Z decks you made?
Karl
No, because they're for aircraft that go faster (just) than 300 km/h. They can be simulated using existing mechanics but new decks. They're a bit too fast to use these new "slow aircraft" rules, yet too slow for existing decks.

Zoe Brain
09-21-2014, 16:57
Will this method supersede the Z decks you made?
Karl
Thinking about it - now we have OPQR cards it's possible we could make the Z decks obsolete.... but it would need playtesting, and only one deck has 60 degree turns (not 90) so slow biplanes would be disadvantaged.
Obviously not having to print out your own decks is a huge advantage, but I think only the real cognoscenti would be interested in I-15s and the like anyway.

Whereas everyone wants a Swordfish or Ju52.

Пилот
09-21-2014, 23:34
Thanks a lot, Zoe!

Jager
09-22-2014, 00:23
So, in essence, the plane only moves the length of the arrow.
Workable for minis, rather harder for cards. Looks good. :salute:
Now we can work on jets and the Do.335 :slysmile:
Karl

Rabbit 3
09-22-2014, 01:28
So, in essence, the plane only moves the length of the arrow.
Workable for minis, rather harder for cards. Looks good. :salute:
Now we can work on jets and the Do.335 :slysmile:
Karl
With really fast aircraft perhaps the idea of creating an additional "booster card" that works with an existing deck might work?

Jager
09-22-2014, 11:36
With really fast aircraft perhaps the idea of creating an additional "booster card" that works with an existing deck might work?

Lots of things to think about.
Karl

Zoe Brain
09-22-2014, 19:40
So, in essence, the plane only moves the length of the arrow.
Workable for minis, rather harder for cardsl

For cards since you have to make them yourself anyway, just punch a hole in the centre, then two more just behind and to left and right edge to get the angle correct. The tip of the arrow should be visible in the hole in the centre, the "back edge line" through the holes to left and right.

Jager
09-23-2014, 12:09
For cards since you have to make them yourself anyway, just punch a hole in the centre, then two more just behind and to left and right edge to get the angle correct. The tip of the arrow should be visible in the hole in the centre, the "back edge line" through the holes to left and right.

:smack:

Jager
10-04-2014, 09:47
OK, I revised Zoe's WGS Speeds table to show the speed using only the maneuver deck's arrow, as per this new house rule:
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1998

I did remove the 3 Z decks, since I hadn't measured them yet. I'll revise this file for them later.
Karl
Edit: added the Z decks. very slow ;)

OldGuy59
10-04-2014, 11:45
Amongst a few other squirrels, I've been giving this issue some thought, attempting to come up with a design solution for a standard card.

Zoe's idea is similar to what I was mulling over, but with Karl's chart, I might be able to make my idea work.

The idea is to do up cards that use the blue index at the bottom of the card, but have a second blue index at the top of the "arrow" and a dotted line, where you line up the "index" and the front edge of the base, not the back. So, front of the base against the index of the card, to the end of the line on the card, overlaying the index, not the arrow at the back of the base.

Based on what I see on Karl's chart, and the length of a standard card at 68mm, this should work for all the decks except O, P, Q and R. Oh, wait. Those are from the oversized decks, aren't they? Maybe that would work.

[Edit: done]I will try to put up some graphics of this shortly.

146415


Someone want to try this?

The idea is that there is some card left to grab and remove after moving the model, instead of making an extra long card with a tab at the bottom. This should make Rob [Flying Officer Kyte] happy.

Jager
10-05-2014, 03:36
Hmm... looks interesting and doable.
Time to test it.
Karl

Jager
10-05-2014, 05:27
Added the Z decks and revised the table:
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1998
Karl

Blackronin
12-06-2014, 09:38
Did any one created a deck using Zoe/Mike ideas of shorter movement?

Flying Officer Kyte
12-09-2014, 12:24
The nearest I got to it was these.

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/showthread.php?20572-XS-with-a-difference&highlight=deck

Rob.

Blackronin
12-09-2014, 13:41
I already have these, Rob.
But I also need the others, more maneuverable planes. ;)

OldGuy59
02-05-2015, 18:21
All,
Now that I actually have some Swordfish, I need a deck or two for them. Unless they are just straffing targets for the enemy aircraft coming in to blow up the Glorious.

So, was there any consensus on what we are doing? I checked out the speeds and I think I converted this correctly, and I used the "Index to Index" method for this proposal:

156838

Fast line: 230 kms, 5.0cms
Slow line: 150 kms, 3.3cms
[Edit: Messed up the speeds, fixed the numbers. Card fix to follow.]

[Edit: A Turn Card, 30 degrees, same length of lines]

156853

Flying Officer Kyte
02-06-2015, 00:43
Are those standard length cards or extended ones Mike?
Rob.

OldGuy59
02-06-2015, 09:49
Rob,
I'm using the philosophy I started with above, using a 44 x 68 mm template. This version is using the Wings of War card imagery, but is essentially the same design as above (post #17).

I tried to adapt Zoe's idea of card against peg and moving the plane until the peg covers the arrow. With the above cards, you place the card normally (base of the line on the card against the index at the front of the stand), and move the stand/plane until the "Index" at the front of the stand, not the Arrow at the rear of the stand, covers the end of the line on the card. You will note that the usual arrow at the end of the line on the card is replaced with an Index indicator. Also, I turned the "stand guide" ( the dashed guide perpendicular to the end of the movement line) around. This is to remind users that you place the front of the stand at that location.

The end goal is a standard sized deck that allows really slow planes.

Using standard movement rules, the stand adds a minimum move of 68 mms. Zoe's concept means the stand doesn't add anything to the distance. My Swordfish deck is based on a move of 5 cms or 3.9 cms. I used Karl's [Jager] movement spreadsheet. I'm not sure if the above card has a long enough line to account for "not" using the stand. Help?

Flying Officer Kyte
02-06-2015, 13:00
Not so different to the ones I did for the Swordfish then Mike except I left the arrows on. I may adopt your line idea for the next set I do. It is very instinctive to use.
Rob.

Zoe Brain
02-06-2015, 15:28
The problem is that if you don't distort the turns, they become a series of skids.

That is, the position of the peg (the actual aircraft location) in a sharp right turn can end up to the left, even though the direction is correct.

OldGuy59
02-06-2015, 15:59
OK,
So, solutions? Distort the angle a bit? A lot? Allow that the pilot is sloppy in his slow-speed turns, and drifts a bit?

For a Swordfish, can we do extreme sideslips, or just the standard bomber moves? What cards should I make up for a deck? Two 45 degree turns, two 30 degree turns, two straights, two short straights, a stall (Steep), one or two sideslips per side (one long only card and one slow and fast sidelip (Steep) card), and the climb/dive cards?

Anything else? Immelmann (probably not, especially with a torpedo)?

PS: Hmm... Not a lot of difference at this speed, but the turning radius gets tight with the "Index to Index" approach. Really tight. Even more so on the 45 degree turns, using the white index. So, should I make up cards with a "post" indicator at both ends?


Zoe's Concept?

156881

This is a slight adaptation, slide the card under the stand until the peg covers the red outlined circle, and the card is straight under the stand. Move the stand until the white circle is covered by the peg. The dashed line should be the back of the stand in the finished position.

Oh, and this line is still 39 cms, from the edge of the covered peg to the finished position.

Zoe Brain
02-06-2015, 16:54
The reversal was part of a standard torpedo attack, used to go from cruise altitude to attack height in a wingover.

One problem is that reversals are handled poorly in WGS. Should be a minimum of 5 cards (15 secs).
Consider - a BF110 takes 8 cards to do a 180' horizontal turn, 3 to do it in the vertical. No, a Bf110 couldn't reverse like that in 9 secs. Even a Hayabusa would have difficulty.

I'd propose straight, climb, reversal (to any direction), climb, slow straight for an upwards loop.

OldGuy59
02-06-2015, 17:48
Zoe,
I'm looking for the simple solution, not the complex one. I can totally agree with you on the poor adaptation of some maneuvers. I'd love wing-overs and climbing/diving turns.

So, which cards are needed? And is the length right using your method?

Zoe Brain
02-06-2015, 22:02
Re simplicity
straight, climb, reversal (to any direction), climb, slow straight for an upwards loop is fairly simple.
slow straight, dive, reversal (to any direction), dive, fast straight for a downwards one (split S)
straight, climb, reversal (180 degree only), dive, fast straight for a classic Immelman.

Fairly simple. Much the same as current, just insert a climb or dive before and after the reversal.

Full loop - fast straight, climb, reversal. climb, slow straight, dive, reversal. dive, fast straight.
For a rolling scissors/ barrel roll, don't go 180 degrees but 90 in the loop reversals.

OldGuy59
02-06-2015, 22:21
Zoe,
You are loosing me. I don't play much WGS, and even less with altitude, and only with the basic rules, at that.

What cards do I need for a Swordfish deck, and will this type of card work?

156885

I found a discussion about speed and distance on this thread: Correctly Scaled Movement and Firing Rules (http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/showthread.php?18067-Correctly-Scaled-Movement-and-Firing-Rules&highlight=scale+speed).

I couldn't figure out anything from that, except perhaps a maneuver card is 127 mph long. Much too fast for a Swordfish, if you move the whole length of a stand? Are my lines the right length, or not, for your method?
[Edit: 155kph = 3.3 cms, not 3.9 cms. I think?]

Zoe Brain
02-07-2015, 01:24
Here's the issue with turn distortion for short moves.

156886

Your method works fine for straights and sideslips. Even for turns of 22.5 deg (as with bombers) and 30 deg. But 45 deg gets tricky.

OldGuy59
02-07-2015, 10:57
Zoe,
I don't think we are speaking the same language. This is what I though you were proposing in this thread, and how I am designing the cards:

Black outlined stand - Start position

1. Place maneuver card under the plane, with the peg over the red outlined circle at the bottom of the card (Card aligned with the present position)

156905

2. Place the plane on the end white circle, with the stand aligned to the dashed line behind the plane.

Green outlined stand - End position

Did I get this wrong, or what?

Flying Officer Kyte
02-07-2015, 11:17
Well that lets me out. I have a great big altitude dial obscuring the position of the peg.

Rob.

Dowters
02-07-2015, 11:40
For what its worth in the debate I think the last card design seems eminently useable and simple also giving control to the facing of the base.

OldGuy59
02-07-2015, 16:59
Here's the issue with turn distortion for short moves.

156886

Your method works fine for straights and sideslips. Even for turns of 22.5 deg (as with bombers) and 30 deg. But 45 deg gets tricky.


Well that lets me out. I have a great big altitude dial obscuring the position of the peg.

Rob.

Zoe,
Yup. To make this work using the Index, and get the position correct, means distorting the line a bit. More for the 45 degree turn I expect.

156909

Rob,
As Zoe has indicated, using the Index will make the line on the card look wonky, but this Index card will result in exactly the same distance and position as the peg-to-peg card.

Flying Officer Kyte
02-07-2015, 23:02
That looks as if it achieves the same as my Swordfish cards but in a slightly different way Mike.
I'll have to go back to them and check this out.
Rob.

OldGuy59
03-06-2015, 10:39
If I ever get around to doing this, what selection of cards should I be designing for the Swordfish? And how long should the Immelmann line be, if I included it?

I'd use the C Deck for a base, adjusting the lines to suit the Index-to-Index method.

Flying Officer Kyte
03-06-2015, 11:08
When I did mine I just made the Immelmann the same percentage increase that I had used for the straights.
Rob.

Jager
03-06-2015, 11:24
Can a Swordfish Immelmann????
Karl

Flying Officer Kyte
03-06-2015, 11:35
Can a Swordfish Immelmann????
Karl

Yes Karl, but I would not advocate it with a torpedo slung.:lol:
Rob.

Foz
10-09-2015, 14:20
I've been working on how to get the slow decks working myself, though I've not done the C(Z) deck yet.
Working from the viewpoint of all planes tail steer, I've pretty much come up with the same conclusions as Zoe.
This makes for odd and interesting cards, the ones I've done so far don't fit on the mini european cards, but have to be 'upgraded' to 2.5"x3.5", the same as the fast decks.
The two main issues I did ponder this morning were the reversal & stall. As it is, the stall speed on all slow decks would be 15mph, far too slow, so I have been pushing it forward to the correct stall speed for the planes I've been working on. The reversal is a difficult one, whichever way you push it the plane becomes faster the slower it is. So my thought would be, that if the fast straight is less than 6cm, the plane reverses in it's own space, i.e. you just mark the front and flip it round.

Here are two examples of cards so far... By the way, these cards are designed to be used front to front.
178076 178077

Jager
08-01-2021, 12:50
OK, a new wrinkle.
Stalls are really slow. I checked the I deck, and it comes out to 28KmPH/17MPH.
Do we remove stalls from the (z) decks?
Karl

hokusai
08-03-2021, 06:30
Do we remove stalls from the (z) decks?

hmmm...would mean, no fine adjusting for bombing runs and no more split-s and overdives for fighters.

My proposal uses the width of the ruler (14mm) to adjust the displacement
- planning: as usual with the stall card
- moving:
variant a)
move the length of the stall arrow, then align he ruler at the front edge of the base and move further by the amount of the ruler width. For decks where this would exceed the slow speed (e.g. I-deck) move only by the amount of the ruler width.
variant b)
Move by using the slow straight arrow, then move the base back by the amount of the ruler width. If this leads to a negative displacement, slow-straight is equal to stall speed.