PDA

View Full Version : Speeds of aircraft compared to object viewer



Danschnell
10-25-2005, 01:50 PM
I have just been testing at sealevel the maximum speeds of aircraft with 25% fuel, and 'empty' loadout to compare them with the object viewer info to see which planes are accurate. I always used 110% power and boost, and for the fw190 I used 'prop pitch' cheat.

Fw190A-8 - correct
Fw190A-9 - correct
Fw-190D-9 - 20kph too slow
BF109K - 20kph too slow
P51D20NA - 10kph too slow
P-47D-27 - 20kph too fast

it looks like on average the Luftwaffe is having their turn to be cheated in this patch. In 1944/45 servers (where German planes are obsolete) the Luftwaffe effectiveness is further reduced by either underperforming more than their allied counterparts, or their allied counterparts are overperforming!

This, combined with fuel leak and 1mg to wing making useless bug for the 190s, means that 190 pilots should indeed be complaining.

It is strange that even speeds of AC vary from patch to patch when the correct figures are right there in the object viewer. Can't Maddox Games just make the planes correct?

Danschnell
10-25-2005, 02:06 PM
Yak-9 series - correct
BF109G-10 - 20kph too slow.

I forgot to mention, speeds were calculated to the nearest 10kph, and raidiators were closed.

I am aware that that 25% fuel can make a difference, but when you consider the P-47 carries the most fuel at 25%, it still seems strange that it goes 20kph too fast.

LEXX_Luthor
10-25-2005, 02:08 PM
Luftwaffe is having their turn to be cheated in this patch.
Fantastic, as it should be! http://www.ubisoft.de/smileys/3.gif

OldMan___
10-25-2005, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
Yak-9 series - correct
BF109G-10 - 20kph too slow.

I forgot to mention, speeds were calculated to the nearest 10kph, and raidiators were closed.

I am aware that that 25% fuel can make a difference, but when you consider the P-47 carries the most fuel at 25%, it still seems strange that it goes 20kph too fast.

Forget this measurement and hit ctrl-F1 and use TRUE AIRSPEED from the digital display.

Danschnell
10-25-2005, 02:22 PM
I was using the speedbar, but at sea level it should give TAS as well.

Fw190A-9 is 20kph too slow if you use the bost figures in brackets in the object viewer, but not otherwise.

I know the speed bar only rounds speeds down, but I was using the same method for the allied and axis aircraft.

bazzaah2
10-25-2005, 02:45 PM
if you redo the test using standardised test criteria then you could either get some people onside or dispel for yourself these frankly silly ideas of deliberate and systematic bias against particular planes. In any event I would have thought that climb rate, turning speed, energy retention, dive acceleration and speed etc are all measures equally as useful as top speed, if not more so.

Mind you, on the plus side, just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

neural_dream
10-25-2005, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
...I was using the speedbar, but at sea level it should give TAS as well. I know the speed bar only rounds speeds down...
No, that is not the case. You'll have to redo the tests.

and use Crimea.

Chadburn
10-25-2005, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by neural_dream:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Danschnell:
...I was using the speedbar, but at sea level it should give TAS as well. I know the speed bar only rounds speeds down...
No, that is not the case. You'll have to redo the tests.

and use Crimea. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ND is right...there's about a 20kph discrepancy. Also turn off wind in difficulty settings before testing.

Danschnell
10-26-2005, 11:19 AM
OK I'm re-doing tests. Crimea map, wind off, ctrl F1 for TAS.

I still stick by my findings however. Admittedly, TAS is a little faster that IAS at sea level, but the conclusions of my findings remain the same.

Now, I discover that the P-47D-27 is actually 34 kph faster at sea level than it should be!!!! Also, P-51 is a little too fast. The 190D-9 and K-4 are still 10kph slower than what they should be, and the A-8 to A-9 turn out to still be about right (probably due to the rounding I was doing before.)

I still stick by what I was saying about porked Luftwaffe planes. A lot of them are a little too slow, while allied ones are a little too fast or way too fast.

I know speed isn't everything, but like I have said on these forums plenty of times before... thats all the only advantage (Except rollrate, which isn't too important) the Luftwaffe fighters have. DMs for 190s are too weak too.

This sim has always been like this. Far too favourable to the reds.

Viper2005_
10-26-2005, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
This sim has always been like this. Far too favourable to the reds.

Look at this:

http://www.war-clouds.com/wf-stats/index.php?navigation=plane/all/index.html

Unless blue pilots are better than red pilots, or the maps are biased (neither of which is the case!), it seems that the blue aircraft do rather well on one of the best servers out there.

The Fw-190 is not a dogfighter. If used properly it is absolutely deadly.

In air combat the DM doesn't matter because if you're good you won't get hit.

Remember that the 190As have pretty much the best armament of any fighter out there. Massive firepower and lots of ammo.

You can kill with half-second snapshots.

Using the vertical you can leverage your roll rate against their turn rate, allowing you to fight effectively against T&B fighters like the Spitfire, as long as you have sufficient energy.

The key to flying the 190 effectively is to know when and how to disengage.

If you're careful, you're almost untouchable. Meanwhile if your enemies make a single mistake, those 151/20s will really reach out and touch them, often with spectacular and fatal results.

If you use the aircraft incorrectly on the other hand, you'll get eaten for breakfast by a horde of Spitfires, and rightly so.

IMO the 190 is still a real killing machine in 4.02.

I don't fly 109s so I can't comment on them...

JtD
10-26-2005, 12:09 PM
The object viewer is wrong. It states a wrong speed for the P-47D-27. It is about 36 kph below the number that P-47 should achive.

neural_dream
10-26-2005, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
... the correct figures are right there in the object viewer...
When talking about flying machines 60 years ago there's no such thing as correct figures. Keep that in mind and don't worry about +-20km/h differences. If you fly your plane well, you'll do well.

Danschnell
10-27-2005, 03:17 PM
Ahhh.

Well that explains it. If the object viewer is wrong then no wonder I thought the P-47 is way too fast. It IS a lot faster than in that object viewer!!!

I still disagree a little with Viper2005_ . Any plane can use height to his advantage to be able to dive down quickly and then zoom climb back up to where his opponent can't reach. Anyone can. The 190 is still one of the worst fighters out there. I agree that blues still do quite well, but thats because they are used to their aircraft's extreme shortcomings so they don't engage until they are in their good positions that they have to be in. Thats how I get all my kills.

Buzzsaw-
10-27-2005, 04:41 PM
Salute

The P-47D27 should do 354 mph or 566.5 kph at sea level. What speeds do you get?

I get pretty much spot on speeds.

Please do not use the 1944 P-47D for these tests. It is running at much higher boost than the standard D-27's 64 inches MAP.

Also, don't test at 25% fuel, test at 100% fuel.

http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/9545/d30speeds6rl.jpg

Also post your tests.

Buzzsaw-
10-27-2005, 04:49 PM
Salute

By the way, the D9 does seem a little slow.

faustnik
10-27-2005, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

By the way, the D9 does seem a little slow.

Yeah, but, it makes up for it in climb rate. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Danschnell
10-28-2005, 11:40 AM
Yes. I agree with user input here now. The P-47D-27 is performing as it should. I hadn't realised the object viewer was wrong.

And yes, I agree that the Dora is a little too slow. It is important that Luftwaffe planes be modelled up to their historical performance, because Luftwaffe planes were largely obsolete by 44/45 anyway. It does make me angry that the Luftwaffe has always had the short end of the stick in this game.

Diablo310th
10-28-2005, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
Yes. I agree with user input here now. The P-47D-27 is performing as it should. I hadn't realised the object viewer was wrong.

And yes, I agree that the Dora is a little too slow. It is important that Luftwaffe planes be modelled up to their historical performance, because Luftwaffe planes were largely obsolete by 44/45 anyway. It does make me angry that the Luftwaffe has always had the short end of the stick in this game.


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Fly a Jug from 1.0 and say that.

HayateAce
10-28-2005, 12:38 PM
Fly ANY US aircraft and say that......

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Loki-PF
10-28-2005, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Danschnell:
Yes. I agree with user input here now. The P-47D-27 is performing as it should. I hadn't realised the object viewer was wrong.

And yes, I agree that the Dora is a little too slow. It is important that Luftwaffe planes be modelled up to their historical performance, because Luftwaffe planes were largely obsolete by 44/45 anyway. It does make me angry that the Luftwaffe has always had the short end of the stick in this game.

Considering until a few montsh ago the British and Americans didn't have *any* late war planes, (and you could argue they *still* don't), your statement is hard to take seriously

JG5_UnKle
11-02-2005, 06:58 AM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
Fly ANY US aircraft badly and you will say that......


Fixed!