PDA

View Full Version : Bf-109 G2 climb rate



TheGozr
01-31-2006, 04:54 PM
Is the climb rate of the G2 is correct?

Somethingis is a bit wrong here..

I love the G2 but something is fishy..

TheGozr
01-31-2006, 04:54 PM
Is the climb rate of the G2 is correct?

Somethingis is a bit wrong here..

I love the G2 but something is fishy..

Radical_Xiita
01-31-2006, 05:43 PM
TheGozr, the wrong thing here is you radius ### rate.

LBR-GuntherRall
01-31-2006, 05:50 PM
No no nothing of missed with climb of the Bf109 G2, but ha a wrong thing here in this forum! The amount of bull**** that u speaks, you unite u must be wanting to appear more of the one than the faces that ja appears here for being knocked down for German AIs , and live complaining of FM and DM of the German aircraft .... It goes to play CS goes!

Radical_Xiita
01-31-2006, 05:52 PM
indeed GuntherRall

HelSqnProtos
01-31-2006, 05:54 PM
S~!

Gozr,

It is well known that the G2 is rather 'optimistically' modelled.

Don't let the luftpansies drown you out. Stick to your guns.

Ignore punks like Gunther....... their not worth your time.

anarchy52
01-31-2006, 06:03 PM
Oleg is preparing a special build for certain market, soon they will have their game
http://marvin.kset.org/~riddler/FB_USA.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-31-2006, 06:04 PM
SPOCK~!

Gozr,

I don't see a climb rate problem in your test data -- so ya, something could be fishy. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Jetbuff
01-31-2006, 06:43 PM
Only the G-2? By my subjective estimates, at least half the planes in the game climb/turn better than they should.

For a laugh, take a Spit IX, K-4 or La7, kick in WEP and point the nose up to >60?. You will continue to climb below their level stall speed! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Chadburn
01-31-2006, 06:43 PM
Gozr, I'm having problems downloading the track you made.

FritzGryphon
01-31-2006, 06:57 PM
You all have it wrong, he's saying it's undermodeled. I have known this for a very long time now, it's obvious.

Grey_Mouser67
01-31-2006, 07:00 PM
There are several aircraft that have climb rate issues...the G2 is one of them as is the K4 and La7. The spit, I'm not so certain about...but I don't do much climb testing because there is no generally accepted method of testing that I know of or has been printed...not like the crimea map, noon etc...

So the argument becomes one of relativity for me...the Spit is a better climbing plane than the unboosted G's in real life with the M66 so it should be in game and is, relatively speaking.

No one plane makes or breaks it for me, but the ambitous modelling shows up on servers like WC where 44 and 45 plane sets still include a 42 plane...that pretty much indicates how it stacks up from a relative standpoint to other aircraft.

LEXX_Luthor
01-31-2006, 07:16 PM
Grey_Mouser, talk to TAGERT about finding a good method of climb testing. Do it!

Jetbuff:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Only the G-2? By my subjective estimates, at least half the planes in the game climb/turn better than they should. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oleg used to post about the need to test without WEP -- but I don't know the full story on that. But Ya, you have to test the flight models of all planes in the sim to see what is going on -- including (*shock*) bombers and biplanes. The community says its "too hard" for the community to do, so they expect Oleg to do it for them -- the result is that Oleg finally gets around to testing LaGG-3 after 3 years and finds it <span class="ev_code_yellow">under</span>weight, or maybe it was somebody who did recent testing and presented his/her LaGG data to Oleg in a presentable manner and convinced him to look into it.

ElAurens
01-31-2006, 07:41 PM
Actually the LaGG 3 is 300kg underweight currently.

LEXX_Luthor
01-31-2006, 07:50 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif Thanks! I patched it.

Jetbuff
01-31-2006, 09:32 PM
What's this about testing without WEP again? I'm not sure I understand why?

Grey Mouser, the Spit IX is most certainly an offender in the realm of climb rate. (as is the K-4, La-7, Ki84 to name a few) Mind you we're not talking overall rate of climb here, just the slow speed variety. Many of these planes have a high thrust to weight ratio and, possibly due to some FM engine anomaly, they seem to be able to "power-out" of a stall into a climb without having to reduce the AoA. More precisely they seem to never enter the "back-end" of the power curve. In contrast, if you take a plane like the He-111, pull the stick well back until your speed drops to approx. 190kph IAS or lower, even though this is well above your stall speed you cannot climb until you reduce your AoA, gain some speed and then re-establish a climb.

I admit though that I have no idea how realistic this is. For one thing, no test data exists that I know of for such extreme maneuvering. We are not talking about the average or best climb rate here, just an ability to continue to climb at a speed that just does not make much sense. i.e. if a plane stalls level at 140kph IAS, how can it climb at 120kph? I would understand if these were jets with thrust to weight ratios approaching 1:1, but prop planes? I find that hard to believe.

Still, I've tried to reason it out and some of the possible explanations I've toyed with are:

- The thrust is contributing directly to lift due to the thrust vector being close to vertical.

- Prop-wash from the engine is 'bouying' the wings and adding thrust.

- IAS indicator goes wonky at such a high AoA and is not reading the proper values.

Alas, I don't have the time or the aeronautical knowledge to pursue it to my satisfaction.

Badsight.
01-31-2006, 10:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Actually the LaGG 3 is 300kg underweight currently. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>no wrong

both GR-142 Pipper & HayateAce (lol) both have said the LaGG are ok

carguy_
02-01-2006, 12:39 AM
Oleg said that G2 was one of the best 109 of all timeand it was an answer to a whine bout G2.Don`t expect much of it.

The LaGG got changed cuz it was a joke.It had everything of Spitfire and more besides gunpower.It was a perfect fighter winning whole maps onilne.In original IL2 it was nothing special,good but nothing like the Spitfire.

To whoever drew Oleg`s attention onto checking this plane a big S!


I helped a bit too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-01-2006, 03:49 AM
Jetbuff:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What's this about testing without WEP again? I'm not sure I understand why? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Like I posted, I dunno anything about it. I'm only a flight simmer/simmerette, so I just blast away at full afterburner. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-01-2006, 03:57 AM
Interesting stuff, thanks!!

Jetbuff:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Grey Mouser, the Spit IX is most certainly an offender in the realm of climb rate. (as is the K-4, La-7, Ki84 to name a few) Mind you we're not talking overall rate of climb here, just the slow speed variety. Many of these planes have a high thrust to weight ratio and, possibly due to some FM engine anomaly, they seem to be able to "power-out" of a stall into a climb without having to reduce the AoA. More precisely they seem to never enter the "back-end" of the power curve. In contrast, if you take a plane like the He-111, pull the stick well back until your speed drops to approx. 190kph IAS or lower, even though this is well above your stall speed you cannot climb until you reduce your AoA, gain some speed and then re-establish a climb. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

TheGozr
02-01-2006, 04:55 AM
arguy_ Mnay 109 pilots were saying that the best 109 were pre G's as well.

Jetbuff:: Yes this is what i'm trying to say .

This is not a whine at all , I love the G2 i fly it as much as i can but for an 1942 plane his power and cllimb rate are dougtly good, but if it was that good so be it. This is a simulator and it is better to have some good specs before 403 m pstch been released or we can be stuck with wrong performances like the yak9UT and lagg or P51,P47D ( Power/weight ratio, props air volume etc..) and others from all colors. It would be nice to have a nice discussion instead of some barbary.

LEXX_Luthor
02-01-2006, 05:00 AM
Gozr:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It would be nice to have a nice discussion instead of some barbary. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
robban started a nice discussion ~&gt; http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6891076604

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif