PDA

View Full Version : Do you think FW 190 damage model is realistic?



XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 06:40 PM
I mean were they in fact that tough? In a quick mission I can shoot down 2 - 3 average skilled BF 109s on one load of ammo. And those kills are mostly ripped off wings, huge holes in wings or fuselage, and rarely smoking or burning engine. I can manage to shoot down one FW 190 and mostly I have to smoke their engines. Very rarely I get to see a wing ripped off and never have I seen holes in fuselage. Based on, FB FW 190 had admirable survivability.

http://www.uploadit.org/files/131003-361067-med.jpg


"One day there is certain to be another order of the Soviet Union. It will be the Order of Zhukov, and that order will be prized by every man who admires courage, vision, fortitude, and determination in a soldier". -Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1945

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 06:40 PM
I mean were they in fact that tough? In a quick mission I can shoot down 2 - 3 average skilled BF 109s on one load of ammo. And those kills are mostly ripped off wings, huge holes in wings or fuselage, and rarely smoking or burning engine. I can manage to shoot down one FW 190 and mostly I have to smoke their engines. Very rarely I get to see a wing ripped off and never have I seen holes in fuselage. Based on, FB FW 190 had admirable survivability.

http://www.uploadit.org/files/131003-361067-med.jpg


"One day there is certain to be another order of the Soviet Union. It will be the Order of Zhukov, and that order will be prized by every man who admires courage, vision, fortitude, and determination in a soldier". -Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1945

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 06:49 PM
I think the 47 and it should swap toughness. It seems a just a small amount to tank like and that roll!

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid79/p9141f290fa1c1c59a2dc382c77af21f3/fb1a8321.jpg


Lead Whiner for the P-47D-40, M and N and Hvars

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 06:50 PM
Are you talking about Original IL-2? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

In patched FB, Fw-190 damage model changed correctly.
Fly yourself Fw-190 and look what happens when you're hit.
Enough holes are made on Fw wing and one burst of Yak break your wing off.


=======================================
<font size = 1>
Athlon XP 3200+, FIC AU13 MOBO, DDR 1024M, GeForce4ti4200,
MCP-T SoundStorm, Barracuda IV 7200rpm 60G HDD,
Yes,I got TrackIR/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif , Two M$ SW Pr2(weird but good HOTAS.Bill,let sticks be made!)

=815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 07:02 PM
I know that the FW was noted for being a tough plane, as was the P-47. But very hard to say if they got it right or not. Will anybody ever know for sure?? I do feel that the 109s are a little too frail, but that's based on "gut feeling" and I can't back it up with data. But to watch
gun cam footage of both 109s and FWs getting blasted , the 109s didn't appear to be as frail in RL as they seem in FB. But yet I have seen footage of FWs getting shredded pretty badly too, so who knows?? All I know is I have flown some offline missions as a VVS pilot and didn't have to use ammo to kill 109s, only had to give them a mean look. A normal mean look will get their engines smoking, while a moderate mean look will get oil to splash on their windscreens!!
A really ugly, absolutely evil look will set them on fire....Never seem to go up against FWs much in campaigns for some reason, will have to do a few QMBs against them and see what happens. I do remember once I was flying a campaign in P-40s and had to fight some FWs, and they were hard to down with .50 calibers if memory serves me well.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin - 1755

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 07:31 PM
Damage model has a lot of errors.
Controls in real life were not susceptible to damage with just 1-2 MG hits. It could happen with 1 lucky cannon hit, but otherways only planes with many MGs firing for some times on the same control surface might be able to disable it.

Now a lot of planes, like Bf-109 or La-7 loose controls with just 1 MG hit. This is very frustrating and terribly unrealistic.

Also too many planes have way too tough engines. Any plane should loose the engine, radial or online) when hit few times from 200m with 13mm bullets (less hits needed for 20mm shells) or from 100m with 7.92mm. Engine cowlings are not armoured on fighters, only Fw-190A has two armoured rings around the front of the engine, to cover oil tank and oil cooler. Fw-190D cowlings are made from 4mm steel panels which offer additional protection. Though this plates can be penetrated easily at 90 degrees, such shots almost never happen in real life. The plates are tough to penetrate at small deflection angles like most of the time in a fight, and even if they are penetrated, the bullets will have too little energy to penetrate the engine.

German plane also offer the best protection for the pilot. Windshield on Bf-109 had 90mm, twice the thickness of armoured windshields found on most fighters.

Also the most armoured plane of ww2, Hs-129, which had 1075kg of armor, more than the heaviest armoured Il2 variants, is the easiest to cut in half. You have struggle not to cut it with the first MG hits. And Ju-88, a bomber renowned for it's survability under enemy fire it's a blowing torch in FB.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 07:37 PM
Desant_CCCP wrote:
- I mean were they in fact that tough? In a quick
- mission I can shoot down 2 - 3 average skilled BF
- 109s on one load of ammo. And those kills are mostly
- ripped off wings, huge holes in wings or fuselage,
- and rarely smoking or burning engine. I can manage
- to shoot down one FW 190 and mostly I have to smoke
- their engines. Very rarely I get to see a wing
- ripped off and never have I seen holes in fuselage.
- Based on, FB FW 190 had admirable survivability.

Kit Carson did make note of how tough the Fw190 was.. He also pointed out some of it's weak spots. In summary he was suprised that such a sleak looking aircraft could take so much damage.

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 08:01 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- Damage model has a lot of errors.
- Controls in real life were not susceptible to damage
- with just 1-2 MG hits. It could happen with 1 lucky
- cannon hit, but otherways only planes with many MGs
- firing for some times on the same control surface
- might be able to disable it.
-

Nah, come on. I don't like that cannon myth talking. Seen plenty of it by the LW bunch in other flightsims, like Warbirds or AH. Of course an explosive cannon shell packs a more powerfull punch than a non-explosive MG one.
However, would you want to *define* what exactly "many MGs firing" "for some times" means? Dunno if you would whine, but I'm tired off the whining I often get when I screw up the controlls on a 109 with a 8x50cal burst in the wings. What do people expect? I'm not throwing billard balls at them, do I? Anyone who'd expect a fighter plane to stay combat worthy after a 1 or 2 second burst of 8 heavy machine guns must be nuts. Even puts air worthiness to question. Same goes for the 8x .303s. Of course they were probably the weakest of the bunch, but many ppl are cool with just listening to the ping pong impacts and continue. What's up with that? Planes had armor, but they were far from tanks. You can screw up a GV pretty bad with just a single 7.62, as long as it's anything else but a tank. Now what happens to an airplane which needs to move along in the air after 8 of those MGs (or maybe just 6 of them) hit it? I think they would not continue as cool as in the game here, would they?
I've read the 109 control DM will be "tweaked" in the upcoming patch. It's just that I already see the 109s joining the 190s in the line of flying tanks by "over-correcting", just like the 190 poor high speed elevator and ailerons were "over-corrected" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I hope I'm just too negative, or else I can scrap my Jug finally.
You know, I think the cannon in aircombat, especially when multiple of them were mounted, was in fact "over-kill". Makes sure the target will go downstairs as soon as hit somewhat good. Just a couple of cannon shells, like 3 or 5. MG, and especially heavy machine guns, must have been lethal as soon as anything above a 1 second burst has been entered. Common sense should tell that. Both is not the way it works in FB though. Maybe it's for better "playability", like the sonar, dunno. Lots of people like drawing circles in the sky, hitting each other endlessly.

- Now a lot of planes, like Bf-109 or La-7 loose
- controls with just 1 MG hit. This is very
- frustrating and terribly unrealistic.
-

Well, didn't see that often (as I also had only ONCE the vaunted "P-47 1 bullet engine instant death" happening to me).

Regards
heartc



=38=OIAE

47|FC=-

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 08:15 PM
You guys just got too used to ripping paper 109's apart with a two bullet squirt, don't know how to handle a real damage model.

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 09:20 PM
I agree with the dude that thinks there are too many control cables hits. How often did it really happen??
Not very often. Cables and rods that control the flight surfaces are usually very thin and smallish. But yet the cables get cut in some planes every time you turn around. Not long ago, I was in a 109-G6 campaign and was sprayed by a Hurricane Mod for about 1/2 second. I lost ALL THREE CONTROLS!! By the way, I was over enemy territory when it happened, but used the engine torque alone to steer it back over friendly territory, where I promptly bailed. Yes, I do think there are way too many instances of control surface loss in FB. One dude argues that being sprayed by eight MGs should result in damage, even a short burst. He's right, but there's billions of other things that can be damaged besides tiny steel cables, rods or pulleys!!!! Getting a control cable hit every other mission is a bit much in my estimate.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin - 1755



Message Edited on 10/15/0308:22PM by mortoma

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 09:33 PM
That's because they didn't have the same DM in real-life too. Also, don't aim for the fuselage.


Desant_CCCP wrote:
- I mean were they in fact that tough? In a quick
- mission I can shoot down 2 - 3 average skilled BF
- 109s on one load of ammo. And those kills are mostly
- ripped off wings, huge holes in wings or fuselage,
- and rarely smoking or burning engine. I can manage
- to shoot down one FW 190 and mostly I have to smoke
- their engines. Very rarely I get to see a wing
- ripped off and never have I seen holes in fuselage.
- Based on, FB FW 190 had admirable survivability.
-



1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php)

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 09:36 PM
With all due rescpect,CCCP on what are you basing your notion the FW's DM is incorrect. A gut hunch? What you've read? What you think its DM should be like? (More likely what you want it to be like?)

Tank designed them to be tough, rugged, simple and reliable and that's pretty much what he have modeled here -- at long last; incorrect cockpit bar notwithstanding.

Superb control harmony, robust airframe and lethal gun suite means if a 190 driver keeps his speed/E up he should be one of the toughest customers in this sim. No doubt, given the gross mismodelling of the plane in earlier IL/FB versions, many got the mistaken notion 190's were easy kills. Now when confronted with something closer to historical reality they whine and cry foul.

You have to trick a 190 into bleeding E to kill it. Once you do, any VVS as plane can slice it to pieces. I fly 190s mostly but when I'm forced to go VVS, I have no problem killing 190s with La5/7, any of the Yak series, Jug or P-39.

I really think the 190 VVS whining has to stop. Given all the advantages you guys still have -- still too fast turns in Yak and Lags, lack of accurate high alt modeling, better than historical glass quality, better than historical cockpit visibility (La5 especially), ability to absorb 30mm and sitll fly, etc -- it's really pathetic.

If Oleg and crew listen and detune the 190 in the next patch, the whoosing sound you hear will be droves of LW pilots leaving this community.

Enough is enough.