PDA

View Full Version : the 190 feel how to fly thread ;-)



quiet_man
08-07-2004, 04:01 PM
tons of 190 data threads, whats about feelings? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

in my opinion the best of IL2 is the feeling of being in the plane, whatever data the plane has.

what irritates me about the FW190 series is that they feel so heavy compared to any other planes.
At higher speed it becomes better but all other airplanes with a similar construction like La5 and Ki84 feel much much lighter. Even the P47 feels slightly lighter to me.

It is not about turn rates, it's the overall feeling when taking off, cruising, changing course ...

I wonder why?

Regards,
quiet_man

quiet_man
08-07-2004, 04:01 PM
tons of 190 data threads, whats about feelings? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

in my opinion the best of IL2 is the feeling of being in the plane, whatever data the plane has.

what irritates me about the FW190 series is that they feel so heavy compared to any other planes.
At higher speed it becomes better but all other airplanes with a similar construction like La5 and Ki84 feel much much lighter. Even the P47 feels slightly lighter to me.

It is not about turn rates, it's the overall feeling when taking off, cruising, changing course ...

I wonder why?

Regards,
quiet_man

p1ngu666
08-07-2004, 04:19 PM
high wing loading

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
<123_GWood_JG123> NO SPAM!

Nub_322Sqn
08-07-2004, 04:59 PM
Why is this posted here?

Looks more like a thread for the General Discussion forum.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

Willey
08-07-2004, 05:52 PM
Take Off times FW-190A-8, 3 point TO, TO flaps at rotation:

Il-2 1.2, 100% + WEP: 8 seconds

FB 2.04, 110% + WEP + 100% man pitch: 23 seconds
after 8 seconds, it just had 30km/h!

real FW-190A-8/N, Flugwerk, with ASh-82T, probably take off power and not full WEP, flaps down before throttling up slowly! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif: 12-14 seconds

VW-IceFire
08-07-2004, 06:00 PM
Flugwerk model is probably lighter...probably significantly so. I would imagine that around 20 seconds is right for that weight of plane.

The FW190 is a heavier beast, fairly tough, very fast, dives very well, heavy firepower, and once you get it going its a wonderful fighter to fly. My personal feeling is that the FW190, although tricky to fly, tempermental at best, and difficult to master, is one of my most favored aircraft in the game (I choose FW190 over Bf 109 in most games where we fly Axis VS Allies and I'm on the Axis side). I also feel that, despite much complaining about it, the last few patches have placed it in as perhaps the best fighter in the game. Certainly other greats like the Yak-3 and the La-7 not to mention the Spitfires and the Mustang are also very impressive machines but the FW190 is right up there alongside them. People who feel that its not just aren't used to flying it or the aircraft doesn't match their style. Thats ok too...but if you like the FW190, you want to fly it online, do so...but learn it...and spend alot of time, even offline, just flying it...forget combat...get a feel for how it works. Once you do...do some aerobatics...and then see how your aircombat abilities in the plane do so much better.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

quiet_man
08-08-2004, 01:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
high wing loading

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
&lt;123_GWood_JG123&gt; NO SPAM!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

how much higher is the wingload than Ki84 and P47?

Regards,
quiet_man

quiet_man
08-08-2004, 01:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The FW190 is a heavier beast
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

forget about the rest, I don't like the 190A8/A9, cause its so easy to get kills with them http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"The FW190 is a heavier beast" why this?
its not to much heavier than La5
about the same like P51 and P63
lighter than Ki84 and P47

but in the game it feels much heavier than most of this planes???

Maybe a bug?
Or side effect of FM limits?

Regards,
quiet_man

VW-IceFire
08-08-2004, 08:29 AM
It feels heavier because of the wings. They are designed for low drag, high speed operation. As a result, the FW190 achieves alot of its speed through efficient aerodynamics. It also dives extremely well...although the advantages of that in the current flight engine are not as good as they could be.

Seriously...the FW190 looses its heavy weighted feel around 400 kph IAS. Above that and its as agile as can be. The P-47 feels MUCH heavier...especially when you get slower...then the FW190 is still much "lighter". Its a matter of how you fly it...you must be conscious of your speed at all times. Stay above 300 kph IAS as often as possible and be light on the controls...they are very sensitive.

The FW190 rewards careful and concise manuvering.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

T_O_A_D
08-08-2004, 08:53 AM
I agree and I tried several times yesterday to move it to GD but for some reason I can move from ORR to GD ???? But there is one over there going right now on this very subject. CLICK HERE (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=284106095)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nub_322Sqn:
Why is this posted here?

Looks more like a thread for the General Discussion forum.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you checked your Private Topics recently? (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=ugtpc&s=400102)
My TrackIR fix, Read the whole thread (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=49310655&m=15310285&p=1)
Commanding Officer of the 131st_VFW (http://www.geocities.com/vfw_131st/)
http://home.mchsi.com/~131st_vfw/T_O_A_D.jpg

quiet_man
08-10-2004, 02:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T_O_A_D:
I agree and I tried several times yesterday to move it to GD but for some reason I can move from ORR to GD ???? But there is one over there going right now on this very subject. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

the GD thread is about how to fly the 190, I know how to fly it. I also know that it behaves better at higher speed, I wrote this in the first post of this thread.

But why does the 190 in the game, need this "how to fly" threads?

high speed wings??? What wings have the Ki84 and the mustang?

I think very good questions for Oleg.

Regards,
quiet_man

WWMaxGunz
08-10-2004, 02:56 PM
190 needs how to fly threads because so many don't know, some even think they do.
190 in this sim with CEM and without is more detailed than other sims. Even the
best have joystick help built in.

Personally, I think the Mustang maybe turns too well. But that may depend on
fuel load both in the sim and what it was tested with in WWII. You think about
that?

Are you sure you get the most out of the 190's? Easier to fly the others.


Neal

BfHeFwMe
08-10-2004, 10:59 PM
It's suppose to be a fighter, in game it's not. Front line fighters don't fall out of the sky at medium to slow speeds and remain on the lines. Isn't it sort of funny how they supposidly lean on this **** plane when pilot training levels are practically zilch. It was war, not a game, they'd have strung somebody up over such a miserable failure. Sorry, not in the market for any bridges today. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

WWMaxGunz
08-11-2004, 05:20 AM
What speeds you call medium and slow? To me, 300kph is slow for such a fighter.
Also should be slow for P-47, IMHO, and P-51's. Slow for combat at least.
Right speed range is around 400kph +/- 60 to 80 depending on much.


Neal

JG5_JaRa
08-11-2004, 06:04 AM
There's a difference between the meaning of "easy to fly" in reality and what players think it should be after playing by a game's rules for too long. How do the endless 250 km/h circus maneuvers you see online most of the time relate to real life air combat maneuvers and their limits?
Endlessly repeating horribly vague performance measurments such as "poor pilot quality but it flew anyway so it must be idiot proof" or beating quotes from veterans - mostly aces - to death about how good and easy their favourite ride was without having an absolute scale doesn't prove anything.

quiet_man
08-11-2004, 11:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG5_JaRa:
There's a difference between the meaning of "easy to fly" in reality and what players think it should be after playing by a game's rules for too long. How do the endless 250 km/h circus maneuvers you see online most of the time relate to real life air combat maneuvers and their limits?
Endlessly repeating horribly vague performance measurments such as "poor pilot quality but it flew anyway so it must be idiot proof" or beating quotes from veterans - mostly aces - to death about how good and easy their favourite ride was without having an absolute scale doesn't prove anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A good point, there are some "random" limits in the game like how fast and how far the virtual pilot can move the controls. Also you can turn an roll in the game in ways that would make a real pilot *****

Maybe that's the reason for the 190 feeling heavy?

I realy wonder how the game (and the 190) would change with different settings for the virtual pilot?

Regards,
quiet_man

JaBo_HH--Gotcha
08-12-2004, 01:09 AM
Current limits of the Game engine prevent the plane to show it's great advantages.

Right now the only thing the plane can show is
a) firepower
b) speed, to some degree
c) Roll-speed (to some degree)

what we are missing is one of the key aspect of this bird.
1) balanced controls
2) great dive accelaration
3) good zoom climb

1) is recoverable. The controls feel strange. All what I read (Osprey books. Man I really have a share in the company now..) states that the controls were very harmonious. This isn't reflected in the game. Applying elevators is tricky and needs caution (this has nothing to do with, tendency to snap-roll). Much more than any other plane in this game. The FW190 itself is, after playing this game for more than 2 years now, they most difficult to learn and master.
Every other plane is damn easy to learn.
I wasn't shot in a Mustang even 10% of the times I was in a FW.I think I was shot down twice in Spitfire. I never ever got toasted in a LA7 and even won in a LA5FN vs. a 109G6/As which started with advantage of being on my six and above and no the guy doesn't suck...
However it is rewarding to kill somebody in a FW because you know he had ALL advantages and he lost. (Good for confidence. Something like having killed Goliath with a stone)

2) isn't modelled in the game. Every plane has the same dive accelartion. two planes suffer heavy from this. The FW190 and the P47.
If you go on full throttle dive you wont be accelerating faster than any other fighter. The only limit is your topspeed.

3) same as 2. Not modelled. Roughly the Climb is dependant on your enginepower. 109 pilots exploit the "Prop-pitch" thing to get some meager advantage and improve climbs.
Doing Zoom climbs after BOOM attacks is very important for a BnZ fighter one would think but it's not done correctly here.
Very often you'll see that after you pass by a target which si approx. 200km/h slower than you it will still be able to follow you in the climb. TOP_Blackspeed made some cool zoomclimb tests in a different thread.

As a lot of people already stated the FW190 as such is a cool plane but it's not good. Some of the game limitations will amke other similar planes perform as bad. Be it the p47, just as an example.

this is the reason why famous turnfighters like the Spitfire, yak and La series perfrom so well in this game.

As somebody smart already pointed out "Learn to game the game". It's a good game and it'ts the best we can have right now but don't expect to open a book, read "Plane X is good at BLA BLA" and this proven here.

The developer paid hell of attention to make this product good, but over time you'll realise where it's lacking this detail.

Sadly, when flying eastern front you'll learn that most of the "not-modelled" physics work against blue-side. (Awaiting the first Luftwhiner accuse in seconds. BRACE FOR IMPACT !!!)

If you want to fly and you're inexperienced go red. They're way easier to fly and master.

I wonder whether they change anything about the physics-model for PF. I expect that the Wildcat and Hellcats will suffer heavily from the same problems.

http://www.g-c-p.de/sigbib/hh/gotcha.jpg

quiet_man
08-13-2004, 06:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JaBo_HH--Gotcha:
1) balanced controls

1) is recoverable. The controls feel strange. All what I read (Osprey books. Man I really have a share in the company now..) states that the controls were very harmonious. This isn't reflected in the game. Applying elevators is tricky and needs caution (this has nothing to do with, tendency to snap-roll). Much more than any other plane in this game. The FW190 itself is, after playing this game for more than 2 years now, they most difficult to learn and master.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"balanced controls" are an interesting point

How do the computer controls setup in AEP compare to the real controls?

Most AEP planes feel responsive and well to control at slow and medium speeds.
How was it in real life?

Maybe by accident Maddox has optimized the (computer) steering to work best for slow to medium speed flight?

This could explain why the 190 feels the worst in the game, while real pilots stated it the other way round.

Regards,
quiet_man

SUPERAEREO
08-13-2004, 06:52 AM
The Fw.190 DID have a very high wing loading, and was notoriously impossible to glide on a dead engine.

It surely is a difficult plane to fly in FB/AEP, but it seems to me that many good players use it online with superb results, so it must have its good points.

The question is: was it so difficult to fly in real life?

I have been searching for detailed pilot's reports but so far I have had no success.

Eric Brown wrote about it in Wings of the Luftwaffe, and even tried its simulated counterpart in FB, but his comments are not very revelatory at all, unfortunately.

Does anyone have any unpublished comments from Captain Brown that may shed any light on the matter..?

S!



"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down." - Chuck Yaeger

"Ja, Hunde, wollt ihr denn ewig leben?" - Friedrich der Große

"Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes" - *neid

quiet_man
08-19-2004, 02:38 AM
@SUPERAEREO
I have no problems flying the 190. You need training and concentration but it has good speed and the best firepower.

I want to understand why the 190 feels so different compared to nearly any other plane in IL2.

Is the 190 the WWII plane with the highest wingload?
Why did they build a fighter with "very high wingload"?
Why didn't the pilots protest to fly a fighter that handles worse than most bombers?

How translates "wingload" to handling?

You don't need to search much for pilots comments that the 190 was balanced.

In IL2 the balance is off somehow.

Regards,
quiet_man

NN_EnigmuS
08-19-2004, 03:03 AM
haven't the fw an excelent initial acceleration in dive and climb in reality lol(quote from docavia talking about fwA8)?

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 03:58 AM
FW is far inferror to all other planes in the game starting at equal conditoins with equal pilot-skills.

The FW can ONLY score when u get you victim off guard, but even when u are flying on guard all day long in a FW the first spit or P51 you'll meet (an experianced pilot in it) will bring your life to an end.

Besides Something you may not noticed, but the RoR was the only thing the FW had in this game but since AEP the RoR suffered it droped noticable from 1.22 to 2.0 and it dropped to 2.04.

as for speed, well you can be 100kph faster than your enemy, try to turn 30? and you'll be 100kph slower than him...

anyone who thinks a FW can be an equal opponent, meet me in HL:
Callsign: "JaBo_HH-Black"

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

bazzaah2
08-19-2004, 04:37 AM
seems to me there are some problems with 190, particularly with zoom climb and climbrates.

Some issues are associated with game engine/modelling limitations, but from what i've read the Fw190 was most effective when used in groups and this seems to be the case in game as well; tactics play their role.

would be good to understand what shortcomings arise from general limitations in game, such as dive rates, and what are the specific shortcomings that could be better modelled, such as climb rate.

I've said this before and I will keep on saying it - until those who are unhappy with the the 190 establish a specific methodology for determining the specific limitations of each 190 model that is included in FB/AEP and can back that up with the kind of evidence that Oleg will acknowledge (such as Blutarski and others did for the .5 etc), then all this is just p*ssing in the wind and the only outcome will be a mudfest, though possibly an entertaining one.

I don't know if the 190 'feels' right or not, since I've not flown one. One problem is that the way in which people play this game is completely different from the way in which war was fought and at some stage people are going to have to acknowledge that difference.

Just a thought, why don't a group of you 190 enthusiasts start a PT, work out where the problems are, send tests and your data to Oleg and see what he says? Oleg after all has expressed his admiration for the 190 so I'm sure he wouldn't want it to be seen as porked. if you get your stuff off so that it arrives after the release of PF, he may even find time to read it. Just my 0.02.

Anyway, best get back to the action.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 04:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bazzaah2:
seems to me there are some problems with 190, particularly with zoom climb and climbrates.

Some issues are associated with game engine/modelling limitations, but from what i've read the Fw190 was most effective when used in groups and this seems to be the case in game as well; tactics play their role.

would be good to understand what shortcomings arise from general limitations in game, such as dive rates, and what are the specific shortcomings that could be better modelled, such as climb rate.

I've said this before and I will keep on saying it - until those who are unhappy with the the 190 establish a specific methodology for determining the specific limitations of each 190 model that is included in FB/AEP and can back that up with the kind of evidence that Oleg will acknowledge (such as Blutarski and others did for the .5 etc), then all this is just p*ssing in the wind and the only outcome will be a mudfest, though possibly an entertaining one.

I don't know if the 190 'feels' right or not, since I've not flown one. One problem is that the way in which people play this game is completely different from the way in which war was fought and at some stage people are going to have to acknowledge that difference.

Just a thought, why don't a group of you 190 enthusiasts start a PT, work out where the problems are, send tests and your data to Oleg and see what he says? Oleg after all has expressed his admiration for the 190 so I'm sure he wouldn't want it to be seen as porked. if you get your stuff off so that it arrives after the release of PF, he may even find time to read it. Just my 0.02.

Anyway, best get back to the action.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i already can tell u one problem

Roll rate.
every plane in FB has a roll rate that is far away from the reality, especially roll-acceleration (which is as it seems not modelled in game).

than we do have the climbrates.
nearly all planes in AEP climb way to good,

the main problem is energy retantion.
The P51 for example can hold its energy verry well.
the FW190A will loose it even in a verry wide turn.

And btw do you guys realy believe that a plane with this cracteristics would have been build in 1939? (where the LW had still a lot of good pilots)

A plane which can do nothing but fly straight ?
are u nuts ?

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

bazzaah2
08-19-2004, 04:51 AM
nope, I'm not nuts, I merely suggested that b*tching here won't get you very far and then proposed the outline of a method that would give you a chance of getting your concerns over the 190s performance addressed.

Mind you, I'm assuming that is what you want.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 04:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bazzaah2:
nope, I'm not nuts, I merely suggested that b*tching here won't get you very far and then proposed the outline of a method that would give you a chance of getting your concerns over the 190s performance addressed.

Mind you, I'm assuming that is what you want.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

nah it's ok, i think we'll se what we can do http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

CHDT
08-19-2004, 04:54 AM
bazzaah2, some lecture for you http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.pbase.com/chrisdnt

this page is especially interesting:

http://www.pbase.com/image/16364663

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

bazzaah2
08-19-2004, 04:57 AM
interesting, thanks CHDT.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

VW-IceFire
08-19-2004, 07:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by quiet_man:
@SUPERAEREO
I have no problems flying the 190. You need training and concentration but it has good speed and the best firepower.

I want to understand why the 190 feels so different compared to nearly any other plane in IL2.

Is the 190 the WWII plane with the highest wingload?
Why did they build a fighter with "very high wingload"?
Why didn't the pilots protest to fly a fighter that handles worse than most bombers?

How translates "wingload" to handling?

You don't need to search much for pilots comments that the 190 was balanced.

In IL2 the balance is off somehow.

Regards,
quiet_man<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Don't have all the answers to those questions but here's a website that I sort of accidentally turned up that mentions alot about this stuff:
http://www.anycities.com/user/j22/j22/aero.htm

There's a chart at the bottom showing turn rates (instant and sustained). Very interesting...

Keep in mind that the FW190A-4 through A-6 turn decently well with 50% fuel. The biggest problem is still getting the nose up from a dive position in a hurry...the plane shudders and then stalls if you push it too hard.

I would imagine the FW190's wingloading was based on the idea of getting the highest speed and efficiency out of the engine possible. The Spitfire uses raw power to achieve some of it speed...the FW190 was optimized for high speed right off the bat.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"

Kwiatos
08-19-2004, 07:17 AM
I dont agree that Fw190 turn too bad and burn too much energy. In fw190 D-9 or A-6 i could stay in turn with Spitfire MK IX for some time (about 1/2 circle. But other thing is improtant - amazing zoom climb and dive Spitfres, too good max speed Spitfire MK IX at high alt, too good climb rate Spitfre MK V 1941 and 1943 CW. If FM of Spitfires will be more accurate i think Fw190 will be better http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 07:18 AM
@Kwiatos:

so you say half a circle is "some time".
well and what was your situation after this half-turn ?
and BTW wehen u can stay with a spitfire in a turn, when the spitfire-pilot is doing something wrong.

as i already mentioned, contact me in Hyperlobby:
JaBo_HH-Black
we can test it, and i will show it to you if you want.


http://www.anycities.com/user/j22/j22/images/turn.jpg

we don't have this in game, do we ?

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

[This message was edited by ToP_BlackSheep on Thu August 19 2004 at 06:56 AM.]

KGr.HH-Sunburst
08-19-2004, 07:48 AM
intresting Icefire and yes the FW is made for high speed combat ,i think we all know this that we should not go in to fights against anything not even P47 lower as 450kph on the same terms, the FW just wont hold its E even after wide turns were all other fighters keep thiers better and in this game the FW level acceleration is horrible compared with all other fighters except P47

but even at high speed most allied planes got no problem following a FW because of the overdone roll,climb and E retention on most planes

im telling you that im running away from enemy fighters most of time when im engaged by them
on the same terms there is just nothing you can do to put yourself in an advantage above him

im glad ive got squad guys such as blacksheep to keep my 6 clear http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

oh and does anyone have any pilot reports,docs whatever on how the FW did against spits yaks P51s etc when not having any alt advantage?

http://www.hell-hounds.de
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/FW190A6sigHH.jpg
''All your Mustangs are belong to us''

Kwiatos
08-19-2004, 08:45 AM
Any know what is with self-sealing fuel tanks in Fw190? When im hit and have fuel leak after short time fuel out even when i have 75% fuel. Fw190 had self-sealing fuel tanks or no? Beacuse in game for sure dont have it.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-19-2004, 11:12 AM
to quote olegs team:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
You were hit by API bullet
It fired rubber and the tank coudn't seal
You were not lucky that time http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Seems that every round is API because i havent experianced a seal since 2.0.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

BTW that specific magic bullet was ONE / A SINGLE Cal 0.303 !!!
i was hit by only ONE of this pea-rounds, got an oil leak and after 4 minutes the tank (former 100%) was empty...

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/other%20Stuff/we%20rule%20your%20world3.jpg (http://www.hell-hounds.de)

Matz0r
08-19-2004, 02:05 PM
double post

[This message was edited by Matz0r on Thu August 19 2004 at 03:47 PM.]

Matz0r
08-19-2004, 02:11 PM
The FW190 is good enough. Although the FW190 has some obvious relative shortcommings in the game, I've come to the conclusion that I love it just the way it is and I don't want it to change. Why? It's a challenge to fly that really pays of if you manage to master it - not to say I've mastered the FW190 in spite of hundreds of hours. That's the beauty of it; it's a never ending challenge, something very unique in a computer game.

http://www.pfy.nu/tmp/fw3.jpg

BfHeFwMe
08-19-2004, 04:17 PM
From CHDT's link,

"It was when one took the three controls together rather than in isolation that one appreciated the fact Fw 190's magic as a fighter lay in its superb control harmony. A good dogfighter and a good gun platform called for just the characteristics that this German fighter possessed in all important matters of stability and control."



Way too funny, obvious this guy never flew a wolf. Even think of nudging the stick twords a corner and watch it tumble regardless of speed. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

BigganD
08-20-2004, 03:47 PM
I have read this every were, Best german fighter ever built the FW190, humm..okeeeey..in Fb/AEP the best german figter is the 109..and FW190 is an runner (also BnZ)

"Get close .. when he fills the entire windscreen ... then you can't possibly miss." Erich Hartmann

bazzaah2
08-20-2004, 04:51 PM
Really interesting read there CHDT.

The only thing I would say here - people can read for themselves - is that it Brown says that the 190 requires skilfull handling to get the most out of it, which many have said on these boards of the ingame 190, though he does describe the 190 as a 'top notcher'.

Has anyone in other thread run any tests on ingame climb rate etc? Are there any tests from RL which show e-retention? etc etc.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

RAF74_Buzzsaw
08-20-2004, 05:31 PM
Salute

I think one of the reasons that the 190 is not as effective as it could be, is that the rollrates for all aircraft are a little too high. And the 190 is also too high.

Since you can only use so much rollrate before it becomes 'twitchyness', I think the 190 loses some of its advantages.

If you had the rollrates of all aircraft reduced by 30%, then you would see the 190 start to have its real aileron advantage.

bazzaah2
08-20-2004, 05:44 PM
interesting idea Buzzsaw - do we know that it's roll rate is too fast? Really not sure that across the baord reductions would be the way to go since there was that lengthy campaign to get the Jug's rollrate corrected. Simple matter to down those that are wrong? I'm assuming that overdone rollrates are not a game engine issue..

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

BigganD
08-20-2004, 07:09 PM
skill full handling eyy? well i can take down allied planes with it, but its still not 190..the guns are still abit not so "good"
http://www.focke-wulf190.com/images/schusswaffenanlage1.jpg
I mean look at the guns that the FW190s had..that should rip a plane in part (fast) the mustang takes half of the ammo some times, and king cobra well..i wont talk about that.

"Get close .. when he fills the entire windscreen ... then you can't possibly miss." Erich Hartmann

bazzaah2
08-21-2004, 01:05 AM
yup that's what CHDT's jpeg says - saya a load of other stuff too - check it out, it's an interesting read!

Will check out again the 190 - usually use it for shooting practice against bombers, 17s and 25s and guns are powerful against those planes.

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.