PDA

View Full Version : best late war LW prop plane, in your opinion



Hristo_
06-30-2005, 11:46 PM

Hristo_
06-30-2005, 11:46 PM

Hristo_
07-01-2005, 12:21 AM
OK, I'll go first http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

I voted Fw 190A-9.

Its firepower is the best among the contestants. What this plane might not have in performance, it makes up for in firepower: What it hits goes down. What goes down doesn't chase it around http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Speed down low is very good and actually better than the Dora given longer periods. Top Red planes will still catch you over long chases, but you will usually reach friendlies or your base before that happens. Just don't get low and slow at the same time.

Dive is great, as well as durability and cockpit visibility. Range is better than that of the 109.

This plane is not a fighter in Spitfire sort of way. It is an attacker and a killer, or a hunter, not an aerobatics machine. You should first work for favorable position, make your attack and get away before they know it. If you follow these simple rules, you will kill and land your kills. Dora is similar, but it lacks two cannons, and this sometimes makes a world of difference.

This is not a plane for defensive tactics. It can surprise an attacker here and there, but generally, you'd better rely on your SA than on your stickpulling abilities.

jarink
07-01-2005, 12:44 AM
D-9.

While not as heavily gunned as the A-9, it still packs a formidibale punch. Performance is *much* better, especially at higher altitude (very important when intercepting bomber or fighting their escorts at 25,000+ feet).

woofiedog
07-01-2005, 01:22 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif A9... with Heavy Cannons does the Trick!
Although not as good as the Ki-84C.

F0_Dark_P
07-01-2005, 01:33 AM
Me like the K-4 best, the Fw 190 is good, but i am more of a 109 guy

i like the K-4 couse it climbs like a pig with a pitchfork up his **** http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

and the firepower,...man!

better then the Fw 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ...30mm

Hristo_
07-01-2005, 02:04 AM
I'm really interested in your reasoning, especially regarding Fw 190D-9 vs Ta 152H-1.

So far we have 5 votes for Fw 190 and only 1 for Ta 152. How so ?

tigertalon
07-01-2005, 02:19 AM
Voted Ta152. If it wouldn't be among options, then D9, followed by K4 (purely because of its brutal climb).

Ta has VERY good overall performance, being one of the fastest planes at all altitudes, especially high. Has tremendous firepower (best weapon configuration for fighter IMO - altough I would prefer Mk103 in the nose http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) 20mm far enough for fighters, 108 mortar for "heavies", all weapons being mounted close to centerline. However, it lacks loadout options of A9 and low-med alt roll rate of D9.

joeap
07-01-2005, 04:19 AM
Well of all the LW planes I've flown I've had the most sucess in the 190 do A9 for me. I've flown campaigns in the 109 and the 190 and by how I fly the 190 suited me better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

dadada1
07-01-2005, 04:35 AM
Yep I voted Ta 152 (but then I would). Good firepower, manouverability and speed. I do feel it performs better low down than it should than at it's rated altitude, where it has to be carfully mananged when compared to other high altitude fighters in game. P47 and Spit IX HF are too close in performance for my liking. Before any smart ALec replies to this, just compare speeds and then come here and comment.

dieg777
07-01-2005, 04:41 AM
Flying purely offline

Me109G6/as is my favourite. climbs well , handles well , has good all round views and has enough firepower. hate the 30mm cannon funny trajectory and not enough shells.

trying to get used to FWs tried A9 and D9 but Im just not as effective as with me109 but then again Iv been flying that for over 3 years.

whiteladder
07-01-2005, 04:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ta152 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I must I have been a bit dismissive of this in the past. But have been flying it off line the past couple of nights, very impressive. The nose installation of the 108 is brutal!

WOLFMondo
07-01-2005, 05:49 AM
For me it depends on the task.

D9 and A9 are both excellent planes to work in pairs but the D9 has better performance at a range of altitudes so it wins it for me. A9 has the extra punch though and a range of ordanance so it gets points there.

Not sure which is best but its either the D9 or A9 and not a 109 variant or a Ta152.

3.JG51_BigBear
07-01-2005, 07:16 AM
I think the D-9, especially now, is the pick of the litter. Given the lack of outer wing guns, you need to be more precise but now that the 20MMs have some serious punch it doesn't seem to be a problem. The difference in roll between an A model and a D is almost unoticeable and the speed is fantastic. It handles extremely well at high speeds and has better acceleration than the A-9. The D-9 also offers the ability to fight at a range of altitude. The plane stays effective from high alt all the way down to the deck. The A-9 is limited to medium and low altitudes for all practical purposes and the TA-152 is really a pain to fly on the deck.

Hristo_
07-01-2005, 07:34 AM
OK, again on D-9 vs Ta-152.

Speed is about the same at all altitudes, except extremely high.
Climb seems to be in favor of D-9 down low and for Ta-152 up high.
Turning is all for Ta 152.
Acceleration is for D-9, except up high.
Range goes to Ta 152.
Guns are better with Ta 152.
Roll is better with D-9.

The rest is very close.

One thing that keeps me away from Ta 152 is its "sluggishness". Response to control input is not as brisk as with Fw 190 series.

dadada1
07-01-2005, 08:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
I think the D-9, especially now, is the pick of the litter. Given the lack of outer wing guns, you need to be more precise but now that the 20MMs have some serious punch it doesn't seem to be a problem. The difference in roll between an A model and a D is almost unoticeable and the speed is fantastic. It handles extremely well at high speeds and has better acceleration than the A-9. The D-9 also offers the ability to fight at a range of altitude. The plane stays effective from high alt all the way down to the deck. The A-9 is limited to medium and low altitudes for all practical purposes and the TA-152 is really a pain to fly on the deck. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would you fly the Ta 152 on the deck ? IMO this is like thinking outurn a Yak in 190 at low speed, best to play to the AC's strengths.

3.JG51_BigBear
07-01-2005, 09:30 AM
I wouldn't fly the TA on the deck, that's why I don't use it. I like to have a plane with more versatility. If I'm jumped not long after takeoff in a TA 152 I feel like I'm screwed. If I have a D-9 I feel like I have a fighting chance. I just prefer the flexibility of the D9 because you can't always pick the situation.

LStarosta
07-01-2005, 09:45 AM
I enjoy the Heinkel.

Endrju
07-01-2005, 09:47 AM
So where is Do-335? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

JG7_Rall
07-01-2005, 10:02 AM
I agree with Hristo. Although it's a close draw between the A9 and the D9 for me, I've recently fallen for the A9 again. The firepower definitely makes a difference, however I think the reason I tend to do better in the A9 is because I know that I can never turn. In the dora, I'm sometimes tempted just to do a little bit of turning, which, well, isn't the best idea to say the least (esp. in a bird like the 190 where speed is life).

I like the 109's as well, but the fact that they lock up at high speeds really bothers me. I like to fight at high speeds/energy fight because at slow speeds I feel really vulnerable, esp. in furballs. But at high speeds, you can just make slashing attacks through the furball and get kills while staying relatively safe.

The Ta's very nice for high alt, but I hate how the roll isn't as fast. One of my favorite things about the 190's is the fact that they roll so quickly. The 152 seems to trade it's roll for better turning ability (actually I think it trades the roll for better high alt. performance, but honestly, as fun as they are, I rarely have dogfights above 5-6k) but its roll still isn't that great compared to other fighters, so you really shouldn't even be turning with it in the first place. Therefore, I'd rather have something like the Dora or A9 which doesn't even try to turn with other planes, yet gives you that great roll rate. (Edit: Dora can turn better now, but I still think it's stupid when I see doras TnBing on the deck with spits in WC).

So for me, it's really just down to the Dora and the A9, but for the reasons above, I like the A9 the best http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

VW-IceFire
07-01-2005, 10:12 AM
The FW190D-9. Served in some numbers, good firepower, excellent performance against all opposition, as well as being strong and sturdy.

Good combination.

The Ta-152H is definately the better performer but I find it a bit clumsy sometimes and its lower altitude performance I think is the same or worse.

Huckebein_UK
07-01-2005, 10:41 AM
If we're talking in-game here then my vote goes with the Dora-9, mostly for the reasons outlined by others above.

In real life however, I'd have chosen a Ta-152. Its performance was unrivalled at altitude and, apart from roll-rate it performed just as well as a bog standard Fw 190 on the deck. Firepower was pretty much as close as you can get to perfect for all purpose air-to-air, and range was appreciable, especially for what was primarily designed as an interceptor.

My two-penneth. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

bolillo_loco
07-01-2005, 08:05 PM
which Ta-152? the 152H-0 is the one that entered service I believe. the H-0 did not have MW50 nor GM1 which made it much slower than the very popular 472 mph figure. it's speed was similar or slower than late war allied a/c, rate of climb was also slower w/o MW 50. The TA-152H-1 which had MW50 and GM1 was suppose to enter service just prior to the end of the war, but the russians over ran the production facility and very few if any reached operational status http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif considering how few 152H-0s entered service I would say it was a safe bet that no 152H-1s entered service.

I would say the D9 once it finally got MW50 in early 1945, 390 ish sea level 440 at altitude. rate of roll, dive zoom, even though its range wasnt impressive it was still better than the bf 109. but like many late war a/c it came too late. of the few units produced many suffered problems due to sabotage. if you notice you can find a lot of pictures of 190D9s that have crash landed w/o any visible battle damage. there was some sort of engine oil leak problem which causes a lot of engine fires. they eventually figured it out, but only after a lot of them were lost. bombing claimed quite a few 190D series loses before they could even be shipped to units. march and april saw nearly every fighter group in the ETO score 100-200 e/a destroyed on the ground and 50-75 damaged. there were a lot of fighter groups in the ETO, and these are just figures for the americans, it excludes the rest of the allies.

I guess my point would be since most of the late war german a/c were either built is such insignificant numbers, were destroyed on the ground before becoming operational, or were lost due to sabotage (factory workes did all sorts of things, like lose radiator hose clamps, lose spark plugs, etc etc) that the only late war a/c the germans could field in numbers were Bf-109G14s and Fw-190A8s

Slickun
07-01-2005, 08:30 PM
C-47.

BigKahuna_GS
07-01-2005, 09:03 PM
S!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Bolillo--I guess my point would be since most of the late war german a/c were either built is such insignificant numbers, were destroyed on the ground before becoming operational, or were lost due to sabotage (factory workes did all sorts of things, like lose radiator hose clamps, lose spark plugs, etc etc) that the only late war a/c the germans could field in numbers were Bf-109G14s and Fw-190A8s </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Rgr that. I always thought that if I was a Luftwaffe pilot during that time frame, I would be very uncomfertable riding off to combat in an aircraft that some slave laborer that hates my guts put together. The possibilities for sabotage are endless.


__

LStarosta
07-01-2005, 09:06 PM
The Fiesler Storch.


It managed to become the LW's last Western Front air casualty of the war.

It was shot down by a Piper Cub.

With 2 Colt .45's.

Hristo_
07-02-2005, 01:17 AM
regarding sabotage:

I have the book "Greenhearts - first in combat with Dora-9" by Axel Urbanke.

It is a very detailed war diary of III./JG54, flying the D-9 from Sep 44 to May 45. It describes every little detail related to the unit at that time.

Sabotage was present. Sometimes they found lose screws, or metal shavings in cylinders etc.

This is why mechanics took extremely detailed care when accepting new aircraft. Usually the plane was stripped down to the last screw and then rebuilt, resulting in inevitable delay betwen the time the aircraft was received by the unit and the time the pilot got it to fly.

While time consuming, it assured no lemons were given to the pilots. Also, there was a strict procedure to report any findings to the Gestapo. And you can imagine what happened when Gestapo went to the factory.

AerialTarget
07-02-2005, 02:09 AM
And yet the sabotage continued. Strange!

Hristo_
07-02-2005, 02:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AerialTarget:
And yet the sabotage continued. Strange! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was an "only once" affair for the slave workers.

http://www.parool.nl/dossiers/lijstjes/beeld/1406-media_flick.jpg

Hristo_
07-02-2005, 02:33 AM
Now back to the topic.

I've been trying and comparing the D-9 and Ta-152 in this game. The D-9 is more crisp in handling with somewhat better performance down low. However, the Ta 152 seems more versatile and actually more potent design over range of altitudes.

I also found out its tendency to spoil the Fw 190 pilot, luring him into turning combat. This is probably the number one Ta 152 killer, but it is not the plane's fault anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Also, Ta 152 has vicious flat spin. If you enter one when low, it is all over.

Overall, I prefer the Ta 152 to the D-9. I can stay up longer and choose from greater variety of tactics. 75% fuel can keep me up until next map rotation on WarClouds, and it hardly hinders the performance when flown right. And there is always the 30 mm, which Reds love so much http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Now, a question - how and when do I engage GM-1 ? I really can't remember when I've flown above 5000 meters, but it might be useful to know http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

MEGILE
07-02-2005, 03:11 AM
FW-190A6

Hetzer_II
07-02-2005, 03:37 AM
I believe the correct altitude for the gm1 is 9000 meters... but i might be wrong.. just try it..


As oleg said earlier before: The ta152 should be able to fly circles around la´s down low..

i didnt see any way that the ta could compete with the la in turning...

bolillo_loco
07-02-2005, 11:51 AM
more on sabotage

book, Bf 109F-K by Willy Radinger & Wolfgang Otto

page 37 in brief,

March 18th 1945 technical officer of JG 6 reported: Newly delivered aircraft are very prone to problems in the first 5-10 hours. It is almost always the same complaints, which are a burden to the unit thecnically and reduce its operational readiness. Complaints of the following nature appear almost regularly: elevator play in mounting lever (hence the need for slider trim); loose spacers on elevator control rods; too long mounting bolts on undercarriage suspension fittings; absence of slip markings on the mainwheels; leaky or plugged lines in the MW 50 system; shorts in the electrical system...loose and improperly fitted sparkplugs; loose mounting clamps on the hoses, etc.

now this is a report from just one fighter group. It appears to have been wide spread because I have read about it in several books.

lets look at what happened to the late war luftwaffe via some statistics from the 8th airforce,

all statistics are from January 1st 1945 until April 30th 1945. no figures are given for May 1945 because there were not any to be given.

air to air statistics

714 destroyed, 29 probables, 239 damaged

air to ground statistics

1,746.5 destroyed (0 probables) 1,329 damaged

totals

2,460.5 destroyed, destoryed in air 29%, destroyed on ground 71%
29 probables, 100% air to air
1,568 damaged, damaged in air 15%, damaged on ground 85%

these figures exclude the 9th A/F which was pretty large by 1945

they do not include USAAF statistics from Italian based aircraft

none of the statistics from the other allies are included.

BelaLvgosi
07-02-2005, 12:15 PM
I'm a 109k guy but the 190D is a much better plane provided that the player has the self discipline it takes to always fly it fast. But if caught slow and low, it's way more dead meat than a 109k which will recover energy much faster and might try some vertical stall fighting if things get ugly.
The 190d is way more thorouhg and easier to land (at least for me), has better armament for high speed passes which require lots of deflection and longer bursts, Oh and most importantly, has control authority to do them!
The 190d has all it takes for being a good bnz plane, control, perfect guns (now that mg151/20 are way better), it's 'tuff meat, and no one should ask for a head on against it. The 109 otherwise hasn't much chance slow and low against the best on that department, and for pure BnZ the elevator is a serious handycap (not to mention doing high deflection shots with a mk108)so as the energy bleed on turns, if caught high by a p47 it shouldn't last as long as a good flown 190.
My .02"

TAGERT.
07-02-2005, 12:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
So, what is the best air-to-air late war LW prop plane, in your opinion ?

When talking best, I mean the one you feel you'll get most kills in and get home alive.

Any comments are welcome. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Any plane that I fly will be the best plane! Becuase it is the man not the machine! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

SeaNorris
07-02-2005, 12:40 PM
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/Typhoon_MKIB_nazicaptured.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

TAGERT.
07-02-2005, 01:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaNorris:
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/Typhoon_MKIB_nazicaptured.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Dissagree 100%! This one is
http://pages.zdnet.com/vancell/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/p38gerx.jpg

Hristo_
07-02-2005, 04:03 PM
P-38 - the Aerial target ! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

p1ngu666
07-02-2005, 04:18 PM
i voted for k4
was just one flight i did yesterday, stumbled across a 190D, i did a climbing turn (180ish) and accelorated upto him, after some pauses and horrid aiming by me he dived, didnt really get away.
scissored and stayed with him, paused some more, hit wrong buttons too so i didnt get him as soon as i thought i would. broke him in half with mk108 then smoked a 109 on the way home.
take off and landing where easy, i even fishtailed down runway for fun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

felt my k4 pwned that 190 cos it certainly wasnt me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

faustnik
07-02-2005, 07:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">which Ta-152? the 152H-0 is the one that entered service I believe. the H-0 did not have MW50 nor GM1 which made it much slower than the very popular 472 mph figure. it's speed was similar or slower than late war allied a/c, rate of climb was also slower w/o MW 50. The TA-152H-1 which had MW50 and GM1 was suppose to enter service just prior to the end of the war, but the russians over ran the production facility and very few if any reached operational status considering how few 152H-0s entered service I would say it was a safe bet that no 152H-1s entered service. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is incorrect Bollilo, where are you getting this information??? Jg301 flew both Ta-152H-0's and MW50 equipped Ta-152H-1's from January 1945. In fact, there were usually more H-1s on hand than H-0s.

Sources "Jagdgeschwader 301/302 'Wilde Sau' ", Resche and "Focke-Wulf Ta 152", Harmann.

Xiolablu3
07-06-2005, 09:10 AM
I vote the Fw190D9, although I am a bit of a Noob online, I have always heard that the TA152 is only good up high so have never flown it.

Also with its big wings it looks more like a hi alt aircraft.

Maybe I am wrong?


I like the 109 G or K with 20mm gunpods as long as the odds are favourable, tho if you get into trouble then you have very little chance of getting out of it with the extra weight.

The190Flyer
07-06-2005, 09:31 AM
I voted all around the D-9, its a personal favorite for me and I have confidence in it when I fly. Im a big fan of the other planes also but just not as confident in the other ones, I feel more agile and quick with the Dora. I love the Ta but I think that the extended wings give enemies more of a target.

Daiichidoku
07-06-2005, 11:18 AM
easily, the He-219

high top speed, excellent cruise speed, good armor, twin engine safety, 2 crew for an extra set of eyes, very heavy armament, some with schrage musik or rear 4 x mk 108 barbette for protection, excellent visibility, good ceiling, great range, tricycle landing gear, plus an ejection seat for pilot and radar op.

operatiung in its enviroment, nighttime, it truly excelled, with the first real UV instrument lighting, and great sensor package

this bird was a terror for 4 engine heavies and mosquitos alike

for getting kills, and making it home in one piece, there can be no argument among late war prop types that the Uhl is tops

Jaws2002
07-06-2005, 12:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
easily, the He-219

high top speed, excellent cruise speed, good armor, twin engine safety, 2 crew for an extra set of eyes, very heavy armament, some with schrage musik or rear 4 x mk 108 barbette for protection, excellent visibility, good ceiling, great range, tricycle landing gear, plus an ejection seat for pilot and radar op.

operatiung in its enviroment, nighttime, it truly excelled, with the first real UV instrument lighting, and great sensor package

this bird was a terror for 4 engine heavies and mosquitos alike

for getting kills, and making it home in one piece, there can be no argument among late war prop types that the Uhl is tops </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But is butt ugly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Hello Daiichi http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif