PDA

View Full Version : BF-109, does it need attention?



animalmotherxd
11-09-2004, 07:48 PM
Maybe its me i don't know, but the machine guns on the Bf-109 seem a little week, i fire the cannon but but still use the machine guns way more. The spitfires machine guns seem way stronger. Also, the machine guns shouldn't fire at the same time but should fire one after the other. The machine guns should be taking shots one after the other. Instead they have a set timing and come out next to each ohter the same time and same speed. I can see this because of the tracers tips. And nother thing is the plane has really slow ailerons and everyother plane can turn quicker because the ailerons get to heavy at high speed, how did the BF-109 become the plane with the most kills of the war like this?

berg417448
11-09-2004, 08:39 PM
To get something changed you need to post facts not opinions.

animalmotherxd
11-09-2004, 08:48 PM
Oh ok, ima noob sorry.

Atomic_Marten
11-09-2004, 08:50 PM
Well, I can't agree with you that MG's on Me109 are weak. I fly Bf109 often in IL2, and the only 'weak' (to put it that way) Me109 MG is 7,62mm. But I did not expect much of 7,62 MG in any case.

What is interesting, that 13mm's (nose MG's on G6&gthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) are good weapon. They can do a lot of damage.. About 20mm's - they also seems fair enough to me. Do not get me wrong - I'm under impression that late Spit has better armament (but only because it has 2x20mm http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). On the other hand on the G10/14&K4 30mm is dominant weapon against anything.

So, if any Bf109 is weak on armament that would be F2. But again, if we put it in the context (against it's historical oppo's MiGs, I16s, LaGGs -BTW these birds have something wrong with DMs-, other..) then it does not sound so bad.

animalmotherxd
11-09-2004, 08:57 PM
Exactly. I'm sorry for not saying which gun is weak. I meant the 7.92mm machine guns. They are kinda weak. And i aslo agree with ytou on the F-2 109. I am a noob so acn you tell me what "DMs" are?

Atomic_Marten
11-09-2004, 09:13 PM
DM stands for "Damage model". FM for "Flight model". By deciding about specific plane's DM, you decide how tough would be that a/c in game.(amateur explanation, tho http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

About FM, hmmm...we do not want our a/c's in game to behave arcadish like those from Crimson Skies, do we? They all got to have proper historical FMs in order to achieve max. possible historical reality while we flying them.

animalmotherxd
11-09-2004, 10:48 PM
Oh ok, thanks i am a noob at this game. For th DM and FM, how accurate are they? Are thye near perfect where as in ral life the bullet would have the same effect? Is there any template where we can see the DM or FM?

falco_cz
11-10-2004, 03:57 AM
Friendly warnings here, you are now sailing into DEEP and DANGEROUS waters.
No, me not brave enough to say more http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

zaelu
11-10-2004, 09:00 AM
Some say luftwafe planes are too good (overmodeled, uber etc) others that the russian planes are the case... The things to remember are:
Oleg (the parent of this sim) and his team are trying to make FMs and DMs of planes as realistic as it is historicaly and technicaly possible... We are talking about WW2 planes many of them existing now only in books... No WW2 plane exited the production line with Guarranties and Quality Certificates as modern cars do today and certanly no money back guarantee, full refund or manufacturer recall. They were tweaked on airfields with kits and after mecanics or pilots feelings... they were apreciated by subjective people in dificult times from diferent perspectives (pilot or enemy pilot, etc). Every single plane have weak spots and strong spots, if you fly a plane enough you will manage to maximize the strong ones and minimize the weak ones... (ok I didnt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif but add in this ecuation the virtual pilot with his strong and weak spots)... this was happening in WW2 and it's happening today in this sim too.
My impression is that BF-109 serries needs imediat atention... from graphic (or eye candy) perspective. If you look at planes shipped with Pacific Fighters they are way ahead from the good old BF-109. But maybe third party moddelers will venture in this qest some time.

Atomic_Marten
11-10-2004, 02:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by animalmotherxd:
Oh ok, thanks i am a noob at this game. For th DM and FM, how accurate are they? Are thye near perfect where as in ral life the bullet would have the same effect? Is there any template where we can see the DM or FM? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd say that FMs and DMs in our game are quite accurate although not perfect (I would not expect them to be perfect, otherwise I would by myself a real plane and fly it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

IMHO this game is whole another dimension compared to anything similar outhere. And this is not just a happy customer mumbling...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif About bullets and their effects if you look closer you will find that we have lot of different weapons of the same caliber. By stating 'different' I mean: bullet tracers are different color and shape, bullet speed is different, bullet dispersion is different, bullet damage is different (this is the most interesting by far) and other differences like rate of fire (ROF). And all that for the same caliber weapons only different manufacturers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

About templates for FMs and DMs, I don't know anything about them. They aren't open source AFAIK. But like stated before, I believe that Maddox Games are making honest bussiness here.(although this issue was always a subject of arguing on this forums).

Wert4562
11-10-2004, 07:20 PM
Hey, speaking of the 109, does anyone believe Oleg would allow a Bf-109T?


It'd be cool for the Luftwaffe pilots who don't like the Japanese planes...



Speaking of German carrier planes, I ask the same about the Ju-87C...


S'far as I know, they would only need a tailhook, opening and closing canopy, and a folding wing animation...



Please respond!

BfHeFwMe
11-10-2004, 07:59 PM
Damage modeling is far from perfect or even accurate. We still have planes that lose all fuel from one tank leak in some planes while the actual fuel system had multiple fuel cells, wasn't possible. Have landing gear tear off from airspeed, not likely, speed limits were for the gear doors. Lose both ailerons from one wing hit, impossible in a real combat plane with independant cable rigging. Could go on, point is it may only be complex when compared to other 'games'.

animalmotherxd
11-10-2004, 08:43 PM
BfHeFwMe
I agree with you fully.

carguy_
11-11-2004, 10:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zaelu:
Some say luftwafe planes are too good (overmodeled, uber etc) others that the russian planes are the case... The things to remember are:
Oleg (the parent of this sim) and his team are trying to make FMs and DMs of planes as realistic as it is historicaly and technicaly possible... We are talking about WW2 planes many of them existing now only in books... No WW2 plane exited the production line with Guarranties and Quality Certificates as modern cars do today and certanly no money back guarantee, full refund or manufacturer recall. They were tweaked on airfields with kits and after mecanics or pilots feelings... they were apreciated by subjective people in dificult times from diferent perspectives (pilot or enemy pilot, etc). Every single plane have weak spots and strong spots, if you fly a plane enough you will manage to maximize the strong ones and minimize the weak ones... (ok I didnt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif but add in this ecuation the virtual pilot with his strong and weak spots)... this was happening in WW2 and it's happening today in this sim too.
My impression is that BF-109 serries needs imediat atention... from graphic (or eye candy) perspective. If you look at planes shipped with Pacific Fighters they are way ahead from the good old BF-109. But maybe third party moddelers will venture in this qest some time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thx for explaining.Not much patience left in me from discussing the same issue over and over again.

Sig.Hirsch
11-12-2004, 07:51 PM
Look , the real problem with MG17 is the tragical absence of Incendiary rounds , so that's a huge injustice to the german planes :

that was the main strong point of MG17 , it could set on fire the fuel tanks , like Hans Joachim Marseille 's 4 P-40 kills only with Mg17 , who used to fire between the engine and the canopy to set those planes on fire easily , or Emil Lang's 12 IL-2 kills in one sortie .

We see that the Shkas are very powwerful as wel as the .303 cal with their AP rounds , but still we have underpowered MG17 because the incendiary rounds were not modelled in IL-2FB AEP PF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif(( : that's tragical for historical accuracy , even Butch2k told Oleg about this , that's really really a pity .

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html

butch2k
11-13-2004, 04:39 AM
My little finger tells me that there will be some change... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MOhz
11-13-2004, 05:34 AM
That sounds delicious!

clint-ruin
11-13-2004, 05:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by butch2k:
My little finger tells me that there will be some change... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You beat me to posting that news :>

Good that this will finally be fixed.

Ugly_Kid
11-13-2004, 05:36 AM
I may be quoted once or twice, I do know one thing or another concerning aircraft structure. I say it once more: aircratft structure (any) is per definition a lightweight design with low margins of safety (if not fire the designer and the stress engineer). It does not include an "extra shoot it with gun and see no performance reduction". It did not include that at that time nor does it today, that's a fact.
This is to say most structures barely reach their respective limit 7 or 9 g at that time, also often tested in a structure rig or aonther. This is the ultimate load. A fighter which is a small aircraft and compared to its size 7.62 mm is bigger than i.e bomber. 7.62 mm hole goes anywhere through the structure and causes a hole of 45 sq.mm anywhere it touches and a bit more. There are places i.e wingspar that don't take that damage (of one single bullet yes) and perform with no reduction. For example G6 got a boost (considerable) when changing from 7.62 mm to 12,7 mm MG. That I spend the whole ammunition load of Bf-109G-2 on a friggin siberian woodshed is a joke. Aircraft to begin with is not strong, aircraft with bullet hole is weaker. I don't mean that go complicated way and model structural consequent stress damage, just say the sodding aircraft goes bugger-up when shot with a friggin cannon.

ImpStarDuece
11-13-2004, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sig.Hirsch:

that was the main strong point of MG17 , it could set on fire the fuel tanks , like Hans Joachim Marseille 's 4 P-40 kills only with Mg17 , who used to fire between the engine and the canopy to set those planes on fire easily , or Emil Lang's 12 IL-2 kills in one sortie .

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

12 Kills in one sortie! Please research just a little before posting suppositions like this. Lang was famed as a crack shot, had one of the highest sortie to kill rates and is often quoted as being the most 'accurate pilot in the Luftwaffe' but as far as i can tell he only shot down 22 il2s in his career. He is famous for downing 18 planes in one day however. Over Kiev on November 3rd, 1943 he downed 9 Il2s, 3 Yak 7s, 3 La 5s, 2 yak 9s and one unidentified aricraft in 7 sorties, amazing stuff but not 12 kills in one sortie.

If you think the MG 17 should have incideneries post something that will help change Olegs mind.

Good to hear from Clint and Butch2k that change might be in the wings. Can waith to see if my MG 17s will finally be able to do something about those pesky I-16s.

Sig.Hirsch
11-13-2004, 02:43 PM
http://www.luftwaffe.cz/lang.html

november 3 1943 , clai med 18 victories with his group ....

Great news Butch http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
congrat to Oleg and his good work , and sorry for my bad english http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

clint-ruin
11-13-2004, 04:08 PM
Not knocking the LW or any pilot in particular, but be careful to match claims to losses [especially for Marsielle or any other North African claims] when you give 'x planes downed in y rounds'. If you're going to use claims like that then divide by 1.5/2 to get a more likely result :>

JG53Frankyboy
11-13-2004, 04:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by butch2k:
My little finger tells me that there will be some change... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hopefully "they" dont forgett the japanese light MGs

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=2661041932&p=3

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

Atomic_Marten
11-13-2004, 04:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
<span class="ev_code_PINK">...Emil Lang...</span> He is famous for downing 18 planes in one day however. Over Kiev on November 3rd, 1943 he downed 9 Il2s, 3 Yak 7s, 3 La 5s, 2 yak 9s and one unidentified aricraft in 7 sorties, amazing stuff but not 12 kills in one sortie. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Holy cow...!!? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

BTW excellent news..incendiary 7.62mms for 109s.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif