Wrath of the North (OOC/MT/Closed)

[Valgora]

Atkemri

Should this between me and you start off with me trying to/finding you downed pilots that ejected during your attack?

[Atkemri]

Atkemri

Should this between me and you start off with me trying to/finding you downed pilots that ejected during your attack?

Nah

[Valgora]

Atkemri

Should this between me and you start off with me trying to/finding you downed pilots that ejected during your attack?

Nah

Aw...
I was wanting to perform the blood eagle on them.

If you don't know what that is, Google it.

[Democratic Tianxia]

Nation Name: The People's Republic of Tianxia
Government Type:Socialist Parliamentary Democracy
Leader: Chairman Xiang Zhao
Side:

[X] Tawwassen
[ ] Atkemri
[ ] Other (Specify)

The People's Republic will be providing military and economic support to Tawwassen, as it sees this as an opportunity to humiliate an enemy of socialism, and prove the superiority of the ideology.

[Tawwassen]

That's a terrible idea.

Remember, if you need a reason like "magic" to make something realistic happen, that means it's unrealistic. Cannon on aircraft are last-ditch weapons because the technology exists to keep the pilots safer and further away from cannon rounds.

So you want fighter jets to be boring?
And of course it was unrealistic. Modern fighters have no soul.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say no still, fighters are fighters, and magic is just too unrealistic for me

[Tawwassen]

Democratic Tianxia, Bendicion, Serpenteum are accepted

[New Mushroom Kingdom]

Nah

Aw...
I was wanting to perform the blood eagle on them.

If you don't know what that is, Google it.

Your government are bastards with prisoners. Good thing you won't be taking any of ours.

[Valgora]

Aw...
I was wanting to perform the blood eagle on them.

If you don't know what that is, Google it.

Your government are bastards with prisoners. Good thing you won't be taking any of ours.

We were only going to perform it if Atkemri wouldn't give us resources equal to the amount of money they would pay for the two prisoners.

If Atkemri refused, we would sacrifice them to Odin via blood eagle and film it to send it to Atkemri.

[Zhouran]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say no still, fighters are fighters, and magic is just too unrealistic for me

Being an aviation enthusiast, mixing fighter jets with magic is a big no-no. I prefer realistic aerial warfare.

Anyway, Tawwassen, what's your nation's main goal in this war?

So you want fighter jets to be boring?

Aerial warfare ain't boring, atleast for me. It's just rather quick paced since it's basically supersonic metal birds flying and turning while launching missiles at each other.

[Valgora]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say no still, fighters are fighters, and magic is just too unrealistic for me

Being an aviation enthusiast, mixing fighter jets with magic is a big no-no. I prefer realistic aerial warfare.

Anyway, Tawwassen, what's your nation's main goal in this war?

So you want fighter jets to be boring?

Aerial warfare ain't boring, atleast for me. It's just rather quick paced since it's basically supersonic metal birds flying and turning while launching missiles at each other.

Yes, it's boring.

If it was jet fighters having to go between supersonic and subsonic speeds to actually dogfight, that would be fucking awesome.
It'll be like WWII, except with modern gen 4 fighters.

But instead it's:

*keeps aiming thingy on aircraft that only the radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappears*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."



On a different note:
Do you know what beats 4 american .50 cals in War Thunder?
2 Russian 20mm.
And pulling out of a dive from 3000-5000 meters going at 600km/h without control stiffening, apparently helps.

[The United Remnants of America]

Being an aviation enthusiast, mixing fighter jets with magic is a big no-no. I prefer realistic aerial warfare.

Anyway, Tawwassen, what's your nation's main goal in this war?



Aerial warfare ain't boring, atleast for me. It's just rather quick paced since it's basically supersonic metal birds flying and turning while launching missiles at each other.

Yes, it's boring.

If it was jet fighters having to go between supersonic and subsonic speeds to actually dogfight, that would be fucking awesome.
It'll be like WWII, except with modern gen 4 fighters.

But instead it's:

*keeps aiming thingy on aircraft that only the radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappears*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."

.... I think if you find MT boring, you shouldn't be in MT.

[Valgora]

Yes, it's boring.

If it was jet fighters having to go between supersonic and subsonic speeds to actually dogfight, that would be fucking awesome.
It'll be like WWII, except with modern gen 4 fighters.

But instead it's:

*keeps aiming thingy on aircraft that only the radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappears*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."

.... I think if you find MT boring, you shouldn't be in MT.

I didn't say MT is boring.

I'm just saying that modern fighter jets have no soul.

Also, this ain't to argue for magic. This is to spread the gospel of Bismarck from YouTube.
"I have the standard rule that jets have no soul."

[The United Remnants of America]

.... I think if you find MT boring, you shouldn't be in MT.

I didn't say MT is boring.

I'm just saying that modern fighter jets have no soul.

Also, this ain't to argue for magic. This is to spread the gospel of Bismarck from YouTube.
"I have the standard rule that jets have no soul."

That statement is completely lost on me.

[Valgora]

I didn't say MT is boring.

I'm just saying that modern fighter jets have no soul.

Also, this ain't to argue for magic. This is to spread the gospel of Bismarck from YouTube.
"I have the standard rule that jets have no soul."

That statement is completely lost on me.

Which part?

[The United Remnants of America]

That statement is completely lost on me.

Which part?

Jets have no soul.

[Valgora]

Which part?

Jets have no soul.

"Dogfighting" in a Modern Generation 4 Fighter:
*keep aiming thingy on aircraft that only radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappear*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."

[Serpenteum]

off topic from magic, should my Blue Brigades go behind enemy lines and flank or land on enemy ships?

[Valgora]

off topic from magic, should my Blue Brigades go behind enemy lines and flank or land on enemy ships?

Flanking sounds like a much more tactically sound plan.
Landing on enemy ships would probably be too difficult to be a practical decision.

[Common Territories]

I think using magic would be a bit OP, given the rest of us (I think) aren't magical in any way.

One of the reason why I want to is because I've been planning on using it as an excuse to make stealth aircraft and air-to-air missiles harder to use. Which then means actual dogfighting with modern jets, thus providing soul to modern military aircraft.

Just to begin with, I was shared this RP thread and felt I need to make a point here.

To be perfectly honest, someone so ignorant of modern aerial warfare shouldn't be talking as if it's boring, especially if they don't have any clue how it's actually conducted. You make it sound like it's driving through LA traffic at rush-hour, or browsing through shopping ads, which it isn't. Though lets say you do and your... point-by-point statements earlier are 100% factually correct (how fast flying machines armed with weapons taking on other fast moving flying machines with weapons is boring is fucking lost on me too, but lets go with it for a moment). If it's so boring for technology to be different in MT that you rely on magic to "negate stealth and missile technology" (you know, instead of learning how to in an MT fashion), why are you writing in an MT thread? Why don't YOU use WW2 fighters since you love primitive dogfighting so much? Why is it fair for everyone else that you get to use some form of magic in an MT thread?

Lets cut to brass tax here. This is an MT thread. Regardless how the OP wants to handle it, there SHOULD BE ("should" being the key word here) a limitation on people in other tech fields taking part. Segregation of the techs is for the greater good of everyone involved in standard practice; as cancer as it would be for me personally to see another mix tech thread, that would be up to any OP to make-up if they indeed wanted that atmosphere here (to each their own as they say). But that's not the case here. As you can see on the title, it says "MT" for a reason. You wanting to negate stealth technology and missiles to "force dogfights" is a load of hogwash that stems from either two things: You want the advantage in a war thread against technology you're unfamiliar with, or, you're ignorant/apathetic of modern technology to the point where you desire WW2 style warfare in MT environments (why WW2 people feel they need to be in MT is beyond me still...). Personally, im leaning towards the latter judging by your comments about modern fighter jets "not having soul"... I mean, just to branch off for a second, what the fuck is that even supposed to mean? "It has no soul because it doesn't have speed limitations, no propellers, and you don't use machine guns to kill other planes!"? Or is it simply you want to relive dogfights of over the Pacific like this was 1944? Honestly, whichever it is (im personally leaning towards you just wanting MT tech to emulate WW2 era technology, which is just plain foolish an idea), you've come to the wrong tech field if you want to use magic. Now dogfights can happen here, though I guess you're unaware they exist still in a certain fashion, but should they be common? Maybe, maybe not. Lets move on though.

Lets briefly cover the fact that yes, there are such things as dogfights still. In the event your BVR fails (typically two volleys of BVRAAMs), short range heat seekers are typically used. Now some cases of dogfights happening (like in Iraq for example) have jets flying within a mile of each other, or farther, or closer. There are plenty of examples of jets, using missiles mind you, that get into heated dogfights. For example, the latest US fighter shootdown of a Syrian warplane took multiple missiles because the earlier ones missed (not so point and click now is it?). Although BVR is the norm now, it's not nearly as mundane as you labeled it to be since 99% of RPers here don't know how to properly write such aerial warfare; you're gonna have plenty of people who are totally ignorant of technology and modern practices found in modern air combat - I don't have enough fingers to display how many people never bring AWACS or who bring some form of WW2 tech to the fight. I don't think you're giving MT warfare a chance here tbh; you're cutting it the short straw because technology itself has changed and it's not wild west shoot shoot bang bang to kill a modern jet fighter. Personally, I see this argument as being like going to two different restaurants: you prefer going to Outback (WW2 warfare) and I prefer going to Red Lobster (MT). Granted Red Lobster is a fucking dump now compared to a decade ago, my point is is that we're seeking the same stuff but in different flavors. Just because you aren't down with endless shrimp doesn't mean it doesn't have soul. I find the very fact you say modern jet fighters have no soul to be the most ignorant and unfounded statement I've seen in a while.

Okay. Rant over. Though I'll stick around a little bit if anyone wants to talk

[Zhouran]

Yes, it's boring.

If it was jet fighters having to go between supersonic and subsonic speeds to actually dogfight, that would be fucking awesome.
It'll be like WWII, except with modern gen 4 fighters.

But instead it's:

*keeps aiming thingy on aircraft that only the radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappears*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."

War isn't a game. It's not meant to be "fun" (except if you're a sociopath/psychopath). Plus I hate cheesy dogfights. The sight of fighter jets doing cartoonish maneuvers is silly and only fit for video games, anime, and cheesy Chinese action films.

Anyway, results and lessons learned from conflict dictate the evolution of weapons and military technology. For example, American aerospace designers of the 1950s thought dogfight was a thing of the past, so they started designing high-speed interceptors armed only with missiles (or nuclear-armed unguided rockets for those tasked with defense against Soviet bombers). Lessons from Vietnam showed that missiles are not entirely reliable since the tech at the time was still young so American aerospace designers re-added the on-board cannon back rather than have the aircraft carry a separate gun pod. Since missile and avionics tech has evolved following Vietnam, the chance of a dogfight between two fighter jets is rather slim, and most likely it would be either a minute-long duel in which the victor fires a short burst of cannon fire and take down the enemy, or a few second duel in which each pilot launches a WVR AAM at eachother and pray that their missile hits.

I don't have enough fingers to display how many people never bring AWACS

Don't forget that those same people with no AWACS don't use the alternative: Ground-Controlled Intercept. While GCI is fairly limited compared to AWACS, it's better to have GCI than have no radar support.

[Valgora]

One of the reason why I want to is because I've been planning on using it as an excuse to make stealth aircraft and air-to-air missiles harder to use. Which then means actual dogfighting with modern jets, thus providing soul to modern military aircraft.

Just to begin with, I was shared this RP thread and felt I need to make a point here.

To be perfectly honest, someone so ignorant of modern aerial warfare shouldn't be talking as if it's boring, especially if they don't have any clue how it's actually conducted. You make it sound like it's driving through LA traffic at rush-hour, or browsing through shopping ads, which it isn't. Though lets say you do and your... point-by-point statements earlier are 100% factually correct (how fast flying machines armed with weapons taking on other fast moving flying machines with weapons is boring is fucking lost on me too, but lets go with it for a moment). If it's so boring for technology to be different in MT that you rely on magic to "negate stealth and missile technology" (you know, instead of learning how to in an MT fashion), why are you writing in an MT thread? Why don't YOU use WW2 fighters since you love primitive dogfighting so much? Why is it fair for everyone else that you get to use some form of magic in an MT thread?

I was just asking if I could use magic. I didn't say I wanted to be the only one. I would expect that if one person uses magic, then someone else will.

Do you not think it would be cool if fast moving flying machines had to dogfight with cannons to take out other fast moving flying machines?
Why do you think A-10s are cool? It's because of the gun. Obviously. And how rugged it is.

Lets cut to brass tax here. This is an MT thread. Regardless how the OP wants to handle it, there SHOULD BE ("should" being the key word here) a limitation on people in other tech fields taking part. Segregation of the techs is for the greater good of everyone involved in standard practice; as cancer as it would be for me personally to see another mix tech thread, that would be up to any OP to make-up if they indeed wanted that atmosphere here (to each their own as they say). But that's not the case here. As you can see on the title, it says "MT" for a reason.

I've already said I'm not arguing for magic. I dropped magic when the OP said no.
Similar to when I completely dropped hypersonic missiles in the other one (they've been tested, but are not expected until 2018-2019 I think) and when I reduced the number of railguns; which are around and stuff, but I won't be using any on my ships.

But what do you have against mixing techs?
To me, that sounds cool as hell.

You wanting to negate stealth technology and missiles to "force dogfights" is a load of hogwash that stems from either two things: You want the advantage in a war thread against technology you're unfamiliar with, or, you're ignorant/apathetic of modern technology to the point where you desire WW2 style warfare in MT environments (why WW2 people feel they need to be in MT is beyond me still...). Personally, im leaning towards the latter judging by your comments about modern fighter jets "not having soul"... I mean, just to branch off for a second, what the fuck is that even supposed to mean? "It has no soul because it doesn't have speed limitations, no propellers, and you don't use machine guns to kill other planes!"? Or is it simply you want to relive dogfights of over the Pacific like this was 1944? Honestly, whichever it is (im personally leaning towards you just wanting MT tech to emulate WW2 era technology, which is just plain foolish an idea), you've come to the wrong tech field if you want to use magic. Now dogfights can happen here, though I guess you're unaware they exist still in a certain fashion, but should they be common? Maybe, maybe not. Lets move on though.

Lets briefly cover the fact that yes, there are such things as dogfights still. In the event your BVR fails (typically two volleys of BVRAAMs), short range heat seekers are typically used. Now some cases of dogfights happening (like in Iraq for example) have jets flying within a mile of each other, or farther, or closer. There are plenty of examples of jets, using missiles mind you, that get into heated dogfights. For example, the latest US fighter shootdown of a Syrian warplane took multiple missiles because the earlier ones missed (not so point and click now is it?). Although BVR is the norm now, it's not nearly as mundane as you labeled it to be since 99% of RPers here don't know how to properly write such aerial warfare; you're gonna have plenty of people who are totally ignorant of technology and modern practices found in modern air combat - I don't have enough fingers to display how many people never bring AWACS or who bring some form of WW2 tech to the fight. I don't think you're giving MT warfare a chance here tbh; you're cutting it the short straw because technology itself has changed and it's not wild west shoot shoot bang bang to kill a modern jet fighter.

I've completely forgot about AWACS. And refueling. I bet a lot of people forget about refueling; of course, it would depend on the range and how long the aircraft are in the air.

I don't want to bring WWII tech to the fight. I'm talking about WWII tactics and dogfighting.
There's a reason why flying in War Thunder is fun.

Imagine if generation 4 aircraft had to shoot shoot bang bang (or any other variation of the sort) to kill another gen 4 fighter.
Wouldn't that be awesome. Of course, put shoot shoot bang bang with almost anything and it can make it sound awesome.

Personally, I see this argument as being like going to two different restaurants: you prefer going to Outback (WW2 warfare) and I prefer going to Red Lobster (MT). Granted Red Lobster is a fucking dump now compared to a decade ago, my point is is that we're seeking the same stuff but in different flavors. Just because you aren't down with endless shrimp doesn't mean it doesn't have soul. I find the very fact you say modern jet fighters have no soul to be the most ignorant and unfounded statement I've seen in a while.

I've bet you've heard stupider and more ignorant stuff before.
And I'm pretty sure that I've said things that are more stupid than this.

Okay. Rant over. Though I'll stick around a little bit if anyone wants to talk

Rant more.
Come on.
This is my last night before I'm off for the weekend.
Might as well get it all out now.

Yes, it's boring.

If it was jet fighters having to go between supersonic and subsonic speeds to actually dogfight, that would be fucking awesome.
It'll be like WWII, except with modern gen 4 fighters.

But instead it's:

*keeps aiming thingy on aircraft that only the radar sees*
*pushes button*
*missile fire*
*enemy dot disappears*

"Oh how fun. ... Such wow. ... Yay."

War isn't a game. It's not meant to be "fun" (except if you're a sociopath/psychopath). Plus I hate cheesy dogfights. The sight of fighter jets doing cartoonish maneuvers is silly and only fit for video games, anime, and cheesy Chinese action films.

Are you saying that you're not a sociopath? Damn it! Does that mean I'm the only one here?

Cheesy dogfights? What's cheesy about dogfights?

Anyway, results and lessons learned from conflict dictate the evolution of weapons and military technology. For example, American aerospace designers of the 1950s thought dogfight was a thing of the past, so they started designing high-speed interceptors armed only with missiles (or nuclear-armed unguided rockets for those tasked with defense against Soviet bombers). Lessons from Vietnam showed that missiles are not entirely reliable since the tech at the time was still young so American aerospace designers re-added the on-board cannon back rather than have the aircraft carry a separate gun pod. Since missile and avionics tech has evolved following Vietnam, the chance of a dogfight between two fighter jets is rather slim, and most likely it would be either a minute-long duel in which the victor fires a short burst of cannon fire and take down the enemy, or a few second duel in which each pilot launches a WVR AAM at each other and pray that their missile hits.

But to get the burst of cannon fire requires aerial maneuvers and shit.
That's what I'm saying would be cool. That and the usage of cannons.

[The United Remnants of America]

The second you forget about logistics like AWACS and refueling is the second I win the war.

Granted, I usually forgo AWACS on purpose.

I'm the Meeseeks of NS.

[Valgora]

Alright.

I'm gettin' off for the weekend.
See y'all fuckers either Sunday night or Monday.
Unless I decide not to get back on till Wednesday because I thought Fall Break would happen later.
Of course that's assuming that this will still be going on then.

[Zhouran]

Cheesy dogfights? What's cheesy about dogfights?[/spoiler]

When I mention cheesy dogfights, I specifically refer to the ones seen in video games like Ace Combat or HAWX. In reality, flying a supersonic metal bird and doing tight turns differs from that of an old warhawk propeller fighter. At least with propeller fighters, you're flying at a slow speed and doing turns isn't too bad. The faster your plane flies and does a turn, the higher G-force your body experiences. Looking at the cheesy dogfight I mention, look at games like Ace Combat and you'll see fighter pilots doing ridiculous amounts of turning. In reality, you'd black out as you perform a tight turn at high speed.

And as for cannons, it's not like WW2 where propeller fighters waste hundreds of machine gun bullets on a target. If you look at WW2 dogfights, the chaser would chase the victim from the rear and fire hundreds of rounds at the target before seeing the victim plane burn in fire. With fighter jets, it's just simply hit-n-run in which the chaser fires a few short bursts of autocannon shells (not bullets) into the target.

If you want to see a return to WW2 dogfights but at supersonic speed, wait a few decades until unmanned fighter jets become active. That's when you'll see fighter planes performing tight-turns at high speed as each opponents try to chase each other (or missile tech improves and you'll just see drones firing missiles at BVR standoff range).

The second you forget about logistics like AWACS and refueling is the second I win the war.

Aerial refueling isn't too much of a concern if a fighter plane has enough range to fight in battle and return to base. But other than that, yeah logistics do play an important but always-underestimated role. Also, afterburners guzzle a large amount of fuel.

[Common Territories]

I was just asking if I could use magic. I didn't say I wanted to be the only one. I would expect that if one person uses magic, then someone else will.

Do you not think it would be cool if fast moving flying machines had to dogfight with cannons to take out other fast moving flying machines?
Why do you think A-10s are cool? It's because of the gun. Obviously. And how rugged it is.

If the Queen had nuts she'd be King.

Im not following your logic here in all seriousness. Yea it'd be cool to see A-10s shoot at each other, but this isn't Grand Theft Auto. This isn't Rule of Cool Tech where whatever sounds or looks cool go; well, at least that holds true to many communities - really it's up to participants and the OP to make that decision. Yea it'd be cool to see A-10s shooting at each other with their cannons (why they would shoot at air targets with a ground-attack weapon is beyond me when they typically carry heat-seekers, but I guess this isn't about logic anymore is it?), but that's missing the entire point of Modern Technology. MT isn't about stuff looking cool in your head, it's about playing your role in a modern technology setting- yes, that includes jets and missiles. Whether you choose to write to the model or stray from it is fully up to you, but it's also up to everyone else here to not write with you if you insist on bringing magic into an MT thread because you think the back-up weapon on a jet fighter should be its only armament. Some people like me prefer to stick to the guidelines in having only modern tech being followed, that being that realism is stressed above all else; adding magic to MT is perverting it into an entirely different form of writing - that would be tech mixing mind you, and I'll cover that in a minute. You wanting to include magic and force people to use cannon fire to destroy other planes in a thread meant for modern warfare is ridiculous.

And FYI, that gun destabilizes the plane and is designed to shoot at ground targets, not air targets. If you're gonna rely on a CAS plane like the A-10 for your air battles because it has a big gun, you're in for a rude awakening friend. Don't get me wrong, I love the A-10 more than any other red blooded American, but it's by no means a very capable air combatant.

I've already said I'm not arguing for magic. I dropped magic when the OP said no.
Similar to when I completely dropped hypersonic missiles in the other one (they've been tested, but are not expected until 2018-2019 I think) and when I reduced the number of railguns; which are around and stuff, but I won't be using any on my ships.

But what do you have against mixing techs?
To me, that sounds cool as hell.

I can't give you a thumbs up or down on hypersonic missiles tbh; it's one of those topics that's largely split in half and depends on the OP's say-so - though personally I'd rule them out as standard practice. Railguns however are PMT; get back to me when a working combat prototype works successfully on a ship and we'll talk about it being MT or not. And I have an issue with tech mixing because many people use it wank, abuse other players, and make an RP totally cancer. I've seen tech mixers from galactic empires invading a tiny earth nation, to a universe sized empire invading a country on earth, and to a space ship the size of several galaxies kidnapping earth by taking it within its hull. Hell, there are fucking magical ponies in MT that make me personally question things sometimes. Point is is that it's unfair to people like me who write in MT's basic definition and who focus on realism because there is no feasible way that we'd have a chance against such foes; it's like pitting a musketman against a fucking M1A2 Abrams main battle tank - not hard to guess who wins that fight, right? It's not always about who wins a fight, but it's generally unfair in practice and the techs out there typically stick to their own kind (or at least they used to) because that was their interest field. In general though I've seen some... toxic behaviors from said communities that I'd rather not write about further that have tainted my personal views on the subject.

I've completely forgot about AWACS. And refueling. I bet a lot of people forget about refueling; of course, it would depend on the range and how long the aircraft are in the air.

I don't want to bring WWII tech to the fight. I'm talking about WWII tactics and dogfighting.
There's a reason why flying in War Thunder is fun.

Imagine if generation 4 aircraft had to shoot shoot bang bang (or any other variation of the sort) to kill another gen 4 fighter.
Wouldn't that be awesome. Of course, put shoot shoot bang bang with almost anything and it can make it sound awesome.

Again, the Queen and King balls phrase...

Seriously though. The idea of using modern aircraft in the fashion of WW2 aircraft is just plain retarded. That's like saying we should fight using 16th century styles of warfare with modern infantry; "Wouldn't it be cool if we wore bright colored uniforms, stood in a line several men thick, and shot at each other with fucking heavy machine guns and assault rifles!?" Jet fighters are much faster, much heavier, and purposely designed for the use of missiles in air combat. It'd be like telling a bullet to start acting like an arrow. Jet fighters are designed to carry and use missiles in air combat; that's why you don't see jets with a set of 4 25mm cannons on its wings, that's why you don't see them using thick armor to stop autocannon fire, and that's why you see them using smarter electronics that make them cost a ton of cash. The idea of them acting like WW2 planes is illogical and mostly impossible - at least how you're hoping it would be anyways. You can fight using your planes however you want, but someone capable like me will down them quickly if you want to emulate WW2 planes so badly.

I've bet you've heard stupider and more ignorant stuff before.
And I'm pretty sure that I've said things that are more stupid than this.

I may have indeed, but you're probably one of the first I've seen wanting to use MT equipment like WW2 equipment; granted I may be off because since I don't track such people and I've see plenty who try to legitimately use WW2 equipment in MT, so maybe you're actually down the line more because they also emulated WW2 warfare.