PDA

View Full Version : Captain Eric Brown compares the FW190 and Spitfire. (quote)



dazza9806482
08-26-2005, 09:58 AM
"I recall clearly the excitement with which I first examined the Focke-Wulf fighter; the impression of elegant lethality that the functional yet pleasing lines exuded.

To me it represented the very quintessence of aeronautical pulchritude from any angle. It was not, to my eye, more beautiful than the Spitfire but its beauty took on a different form- the contrast being such as that between blonde and brunette!"

Sly old dog! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

also:

"... I was pleasantly surprised to find, after clambering into the somewhat narrow cockpit, that the forward view was still rather better than was offered by the bf109, the Spitfire or the Mustang"

think i might regret posting the second bit. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


the guy has a way with words- anyone know what pulchritude means?

faustnik
08-26-2005, 10:08 AM
All RAF test pilots were huge Fw190 fans for some reason. I think they had roll-envy. LW test pilots probably loved Spitfires and had turn-envy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cpt. Brown rated the Spitfire and the Fw190 as the two best fighters of the war comparing them to all the LW and Allied types.

ploughman
08-26-2005, 10:19 AM
"... I was pleasantly surprised to find, after clambering into the somewhat narrow cockpit, that the forward view was still rather better than was offered by the bf109, the Spitfire or the Mustang"

"..., but then I sat down."

Heliopause
08-26-2005, 10:39 AM
A few pics...

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a138/heliopause/FwGBGround-.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a138/heliopause/FwGBGround.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a138/heliopause/FwGB.jpg

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 11:24 AM
quote:
"... I was pleasantly surprised to find, after clambering into the somewhat narrow cockpit, that the forward view was still rather better than was offered by the bf109, the Spitfire or the Mustang"


"..., but then I sat down."

http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/4065/view3gj.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Tvrdi
08-26-2005, 11:35 AM
yes Kocur, Fw190 forward view was better than in Spit...but we can post a million bugs for both, red and blue planes....btw, FW190 was VERY MANEUVERABLE AND AGILE fighter, nothing like it is in this sim...and ofcourse it was smaller than it is in the game compared to the other planes (p47 on ex.)...the same for bf109 (regarding bigness)...

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 11:43 AM
Im kinda "young" here, but I think I know in general long and bitter story of "the bar". Its annoying me.

F19_Ob
08-26-2005, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by dazza9806482:

"... I was pleasantly surprised to find, after clambering into the somewhat narrow cockpit, that the forward view was still rather better than was offered by the bf109, the Spitfire or the Mustang"

think i might regret posting the second bit. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



The view in fw190 is actually better , but in the sim they forgot to give it proper out-zoom like in the me262.

Example:

maximum outzoom with "shift+F1" in the fw190.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v382/f19_ob/fw190-2.jpg

maximum outzoom with "shift+F1" in the me262.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v382/f19_ob/Me262-b.jpg

I suggested oleg to re-examine zoom-issues in his next sim.

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

F19_Ob
08-26-2005, 11:53 AM
This same zoom-issue is ofcourse present in other planes aswell, not just the fw190.
il-2 and other bombers and stukas for example.

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 11:53 AM
Yep, something strange happened here...In that shift+F1 mode, view forwards in Fw-190is EVEN WORSE...

BigKahuna_GS
08-26-2005, 12:28 PM
S!


That's too bad about the bar and forward view in the 190--it should of been fixed a long time ago.


__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________
Tvrdi --yes Kocur, Fw190 forward view was better than in Spit...but we can post a million bugs for both, red and blue planes....btw, FW190 was VERY MANEUVERABLE AND AGILE fighter, nothing like it is in this sim...and ofcourse it was smaller than it is in the game compared to the other planes (p47 on ex.)...the same for bf109 (regarding bigness)...
__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


I am not sure what you are talking about because the 190 turn rate improved a couple of patches ago and in 4.01 it has one of the best flight models in the game. I have had several 190s stay with me in high speed turns while flying a P51.

Both the 109/190 are stable gun platforms while the Spit, P51, P47 and many other allied planes feel like they are balencing on the head of a pin.

I had to laugh the other day a 190D9 was turnfighting on the deck with a Spit on Warclouds. The 190 driver would just go into a high yo-yo whenever the Spit broke into a turn and then the 190 would come roaring back down after the Spit. This lasted for several minutes until we could come rescue the Spit pilot. Why the Spit didnt turn full circles until he was behind the 190 is beyond me .


___

faustnik
08-26-2005, 12:33 PM
The bar was modeled by the same standards that all other a/c in the sim were modeled by.

faustnik
08-26-2005, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

I am not sure what you are talking about because the 190 turn rate improved a couple of patches ago and in 4.01 it has one of the best flight models in the game. I have had several 190s stay with me in high speed turns while flying a P51.

Both the 109/190 are stable gun platforms while the Spit, P51, P47 and many other allied planes feel like they are balencing on the head of a pin.

___

Yes, the Fw190 has been improved in turn. It can keep up, with the P-51 at some speeds if flown hard, as it should.

As for stable gun platform, the Fw190 is little different from the other a/c you mentioned. Many people have used that exact comment "balancing on the head of a pin" for the Fw190 in 4.01. It is not comparable to the Bf109 in 4.01 in terms of stability. There seems to be a tendency by many to lump the modeling of all LW planes together, but, that is not accurate.

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 12:47 PM
Tvrdi --yes Kocur, Fw190 forward view was better than in Spit...but we can post a million bugs for both, red and blue planes....btw, FW190 was VERY MANEUVERABLE AND AGILE fighter, nothing like it is in this sim...and ofcourse it was smaller than it is in the game compared to the other planes (p47 on ex.)...the same for bf109 (regarding bigness)...
__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


I am not sure what you are talking about because the 190 turn rate improved a couple of patches ago and in 4.01 it has one of the best flight models in the game. I have had several 190s stay with me in high speed turns while flying a P51.

I dont belive it could win low speed horizontal turn fight with almost if not any of allied fighters really.

I have had several 190s stay with me in high speed turns while flying a P51.
As much as low speed turning wasnt and isnt good for 190, high speed manouvering is a different story. At higher speeds its not wingloading or slats are decisive but elevator aouthority. And that was good in Fw190 and very good, if not TOO good, in P-51. So I see nothing wrong with D9 staying at P51's six at high speed (not implying you do)

I had to laugh the other day a 190D9 was turnfighting on the deck with a Spit on Warclouds. The 190 driver would just go into a high yo-yo whenever the Spit broke into a turn and then the 190 would come roaring back down after the Spit. This lasted for several minutes until we could come rescue the Spit pilot. Why the Spit didnt turn full circles until he was behind the 190 is beyond me .
Well D9 pilot did what was right, but Spit pilot might have got impression of being "outturned" in literal meaning, with all consequenses of that impression, i.e. thoughts will lots of adjective "overmodelled"http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 12:53 PM
The bar was modeled by the same standards that all other a/c in the sim were modeled by.

So those standards make this game falling away from being a sim. How can there be things modelled in a SIMULATION, that were not present in reality that is supposed to be SIMULATED. RL pilots of Fw190 were looking at real cocpit with real thick glass. They were not looking at drawning of the cocpit (which doesnt include refraction) like we are.

danjama
08-26-2005, 01:00 PM
i like the 190. Bar is realistic for that plane, stop cryin http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

dazza9806482
08-26-2005, 01:09 PM
Thing is despite the second section i posted,i dont have any issue with the FW190 view

sure there is room for improvement, but the sim does its best to accurately represent...

my main thrust was the fact that i would never have bought and enjoyed books like Eric Browns had i not played il2


i have been around long enough to read all the intelligent threads re. the FW view

i reckon the best fw pilots can cope with it. indeed watch GOODKNIGHTS deflection skill is amazing

the p47 suffers the same issue and whilst we could argue all day about refraction and zooms the simple fact that our virtual heads are static renders the representations liable for criticism

eric brown could no doubt move his head 3 inches to the side and experience an excellent view, and overall the FW is possessed with excellent visibility


i was more amused by Capt Browns suave 1940's fighter pilot skills, comparing women and planes.

add beer and this forum is made http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 01:09 PM
Am I supposed to laugh already or its not it all yet?

BigKahuna_GS
08-26-2005, 01:21 PM
S!



Faustnik--As for stable gun platform, the Fw190 is little different from the other a/c you mentioned. Many people have used that exact comment "balancing on the head of a pin" for the Fw190 in 4.01. It is not comparable to the Bf109 in 4.01 in terms of stability. There seems to be a tendency by many to lump the modeling of all LW planes together, but, that is not accurate.


Hya Faust--well the question that should asked then is the 190 more of a stable gun plaform vs allied fighters ? I would say yes.

Try aquiring a firing solution and shooting in the Spit, P51, P47 vs 190. The 190 tracks smoother, hence a more stable gun platform in 4.01.


___


__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
Kokur--I dont belive it could win low speed horizontal turn fight with almost if not any of allied fighters really.
__________________________________________________ _____________________________________________



That is not really the 190's strong point is it ?

I believe the 190 can out turn the P47 on the deck (which I dont think is correct) and I have had some real hard turning battles with 190s while flying a P51 on the deck at slow speeds.



__________________________________________________ _____________________________________________
quote:
I had to laugh the other day a 190D9 was turnfighting on the deck with a Spit on Warclouds. The 190 driver would just go into a high yo-yo whenever the Spit broke into a turn and then the 190 would come roaring back down after the Spit. This lasted for several minutes until we could come rescue the Spit pilot. Why the Spit didnt turn full circles until he was behind the 190 is beyond me .

Kocur--Well D9 pilot did what was right, but Spit pilot might have got impression of being "outturned" in literal meaning, with all consequenses of that impression, i.e. thoughts will lots of adjective "overmodelled"
__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________



Well I was the guy who shot the 190D9 off the Spit's tail. I was returning to base and this turned into a running battle. I could see the fight from a long ways off and I was surprised the other friendly Spit there (2spit vs 190d9) had not already shot the D9 down. I got to witness first hand how the 190 pilot was flying--(he really flew it quite well). I was in a P38L Late and I simply dumped combat flaps and stayed with him in his high yo-yo. At first my guns were not having much affect but I finally brought him down.

After what I had seen, the D9 was flown very well and had the performance to effectively manuever quite well at stall speeds and use it speed/acceleration to perform vertical manuevers to enhance it's turning ability.

So my point is that I disagree with the previous poster-the 190 can be very agile and manueverable. What I should point out is that late model 190 such as the D9 had very high wing loading and could not turn as well as a 190A4, A5, A6, especially as speed dropped off.


____

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 01:24 PM
eric brown could no doubt move his head 3 inches to the side and experience an excellent view, and overall the FW is possessed with excellent visibility
"The sighting view, when sitting comfortably(...)"

Lack of modelling human eyes steroscopic view, which makes things like cocpit struts look semi transparent on sides, when concentrating ones sight at distant object is one thing, and refraction is another.

faustnik
08-26-2005, 01:26 PM
Try aquiring a firing solution and shooting in the Spit, P51, P47 vs 190. The 190 tracks smoother, hence a more stable gun platform in 4.01.

I have tested this and the "bounce" with the Fw190A is very similar to the Spit, and USAAF planes. The big advantage to the Fw190 is that only very short bursts are required. One tap of the trigger puts enough 20mm rounds on a target to cripple it. With the USAAF planes, you need to hold the bullet stream on the target while the nose is wandering, which is very difficult.

Oh and with P-47, P-51 and Fw190 turning fights, there are too many accounts from both sides of "winning" whis matchup. It's a too close to call situation, depending on pilot skill and speed. Gibbage did turn tests in 4.01 and the order from best to worst was P-51>P-47>Fw190A with all being close. That seems fine to me.

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 01:35 PM
I have had some real hard turning battles with 190s while flying a P51 on the deck at slow speeds.

Well P-51 is that one possible "any" I meant above. High wingloading reduces slow manouvernig capabilities of Fw-190, on the other hand laminar wings does the same to P-51, as the main "contra" of lamiar wings is smaller increase of lift when AoA rises compared to regular airfoil wings. I cant tell if it affected P-51 hard enough to make it not able to outturn Fw-190 at low speed on deck?

What I should point out is that late model 190 such as the D9 had very high wing loading and could not turn as well as a 190A4, A5, A6, especially as speed dropped off.
Agreed!

BigKahuna_GS
08-26-2005, 01:41 PM
S!


Well P-51 is that one possible "any" I meant above. High wingloading reduces slow manouvernig capabilities of Fw-190, on the other hand laminar wings does the same to P-51, as the main "contra" of lamiar wings is smaller increase of lift when AoA rises compared to regular airfoil wings. I cant tell if it affected P-51 hard enough to make it not able to outturn Fw-190 at low speed on deck?


I dont know if I am right here but the P51 has considerbly lower wing loading vs late model 190's. I thought this would give the P51 a disticnt advantage in a slow speed turn fight on the deck vs late model 190's.



____

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 01:57 PM
Yes, wingloading of Fw-190 was higher, but laminar flow wings having advantage over regular one in drag, which is considerably lower than in regular wing, which was key to great P-51 range, has a disadvantage too. When you turn, you make you plane fly at higher angle of attack. When AoA rises so do lift and drag. In case of regular wing, up to certain value of AoA increace of lift is greater than increace of drag. But in case of laminar wing increase of lift is considerably smaller than on regular wing. Result is that laminar wing reduces planes turning abilities at low speeds - even though you pull your stick, laminar wing produces less lift which is "pulling" entire plane into turn. I.e. with wings of the same area, but using regular airfoil P-51 would turn better than did IRL.

faustnik
08-26-2005, 01:58 PM
This site has some interesting stuff with relative turn info if you scroll down:

http://www.anycities.com/user/j22/j22/aero.htm

ploughman
08-26-2005, 02:06 PM
Thanks for the read Faustnik, very interesting.

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 02:22 PM
Very, very interesting thing! Thank you Faustnik!

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 02:46 PM
What we see (apart from F22 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) is comparison of 1st generation of low wing fighters (Spitfire) and those of 2nd generation (P-51, Fw-190). Whe see advancing in direction of better acceleration and speed, with sacrificing turning capabilities.
Take a look at P-51 wet area and drag: even though Muatangs wet area is the greatest, its wet area/drag ratio is the best. How? Mustangs thin wing with its laminar flow airfoil, with less drag then conventional airfoil is the answer.
Flat plate area is similar for both P-51D and Fw-190D9 (not A, because D has in-line engine too). That is the key to their better acceleration. Kurt Tank's way to achieve that was reducing area of wing, which is visible on wet area graph.
So using different methods Schmued and Tank achieved the same result, that is better acceleration and speed than those of Spitfire. But that is engineering, and nothing comes for free. Penalty here for both P-51 and Fw-190 is worse than Spitfire's turning abilities. Different reasons of that for both: worse than regular wings low speed parameters of laminar wing in P-51 case and high wingloading due to reduced wing area in Fw-190 case.

han freak solo
08-26-2005, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:
Im kinda "young" here, but I think I know in general long and bitter story of "the bar". Its annoying me.

I'm still waiting on the proper FW190 bar in patch 4.Oh whenever.

http://www.lssdigital.com/FW190bar.jpg

Tvrdi
08-26-2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!


That's too bad about the bar and forward view in the 190--it should of been fixed a long time ago.

__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________
Tvrdi --yes Kocur, Fw190 forward view was better than in Spit...but we can post a million bugs for both, red and blue planes....btw, FW190 was VERY MANEUVERABLE AND AGILE fighter, nothing like it is in this sim...and ofcourse it was smaller than it is in the game compared to the other planes (p47 on ex.)...the same for bf109 (regarding bigness)...
__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


I am not sure what you are talking about because the 190 turn rate improved a couple of patches ago and in 4.01 it has one of the best flight models in the game. I have had several 190s stay with me in high speed turns while flying a P51.

Both the 109/190 are stable gun platforms while the Spit, P51, P47 and many other allied planes feel like they are balencing on the head of a pin.

I had to laugh the other day a 190D9 was turnfighting on the deck with a Spit on Warclouds. The 190 driver would just go into a high yo-yo whenever the Spit broke into a turn and then the 190 would come roaring back down after the Spit. This lasted for several minutes until we could come rescue the Spit pilot. Why the Spit didnt turn full circles until he was behind the 190 is beyond me .





I was talking about antons....btw did you noticed how "shaky" is the nose (and whole plane) of a FW even in gently pulls and turns? similar thing in Bf109....you hav a feeling like ur in a washmachine when flyin LW plane....and FW190 has a nasty tendention to stall very easily...not to mention that its hard to recover from stall...I mean harder than in any other plane...

p1ngu666
08-26-2005, 04:33 PM
do u fly other planes, or are u just trolling?

Tvrdi
08-26-2005, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
do u fly other planes, or are u just trolling?

FWs, Bfs, P47s, Corsairs, Zekes...I used to fly more often mustangs, vvs planes etc....if you want my all time favourites are FW and P47 equaly....Im flyin blue and red planes, unlike most of the guys now.....so.....psst


btw it would be nice to have P47s vs FW190As server so noobs can play somewher else in their playground...

faustnik
08-26-2005, 04:56 PM
Tvrdi,

I thing P1ng was just a little suprised that you felt the LW planes were poor turners. The Fw190's turn was very much improved with 4.01. It is still behind most other fighters in turn ability (as it should be AFAIK) but, is much better than before. The stall in the Fw190 has been lessened in severity and stall speed reduced in 4.01 as well. The Bf109 has the best low speed turn stability of any plane in sim in 4.01 as far as I can tell.

**********

We used to have a P-47 vs. Fw190A DF server on Forgotten Server, it was a great matchup. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 05:05 PM
I thing P1ng was just a little suprised that you felt the LW planes were poor turners. The Fw190's turn was very much improved with 4.01. It is still behind most other fighters in turn ability (as it should be AFAIK) but, is much better than before. The stall in the Fw190 has been lessened in severity and stall speed reduced in 4.01 as well. The Bf109 has the best low speed turn stability of any plane in sim in 4.01 as far as I can tell.
Agreed!

FritzGryphon
08-26-2005, 05:10 PM
I don't see how the FW turn could be improved. Before 4.01, it was 23 seconds sustained. It still is.

Maybe qualitatively, in terms of feel or something. But the actual rate is the same.

What has changed is the elevator effectiveness. It used to be much more responsive, like P-51. Since it is stiffer now, the aircraft will appear not to stall as often (when really, nothing actually changed).

More turn rates.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m...241035933#1241035933 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1241035933/r/1241035933#1241035933)

Kocur_
08-26-2005, 05:23 PM
I don't see how the FW turn could be improved. Before 4.01, it was 23 seconds sustained. It still is.


What has changed is the elevator effectiveness. It used to be much more responsive, like P-51. Since it is stiffer now, the aircraft will appear not to stall as often (when really, nothing actually changed).

I observe worse elevator effectiveness, I can no longer do snap shots at high speed in head on situations. But I, yes indeed merely feel, Fw-190 has less tendency to do accelerated stalls in 4.xx.

p1ngu666
08-26-2005, 05:30 PM
its softer, makes it easier to fly, but misses some of what we liked about 190

i fly anything, but i havent been flying much at all recently

didnt mean to jump on u so much, just fed up of the trolling/fishing thats gone on here recently http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Xiolablu3
08-26-2005, 06:23 PM
I have always wondered why the makers of the aircraft/gunsights didnt mount them a lot higher and harmonise the guns accordingly.

There shouldnt be any problem with doing this, just aiming the guns so they converge a little higher.

This would make leading your shot/deflection shooting much, much easier.

I cant help thinking that views in the real aircraft cant have been as bad, otherwise they would have done this.

Deflection shooting in a Fw190 contains a LOT of guesswork becasue the sight is mounted so low. If it was a bit higher, this would mean less guesswork the higher it was mounted.

pourshot
08-26-2005, 11:04 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I have always wondered why the makers of the aircraft/gunsights didnt mount them a lot higher and harmonise the guns accordingly.

There shouldnt be any problem with doing this, just aiming the guns so they converge a little higher.

This would make leading your shot/deflection shooting much, much easier.

I cant help thinking that views in the real aircraft cant have been as bad, otherwise they would have done this.

Deflection shooting in a Fw190 contains a LOT of guesswork becasue the sight is mounted so low. If it was a bit higher, this would mean less guesswork the higher it was mounted.

I think you will find that most ww2 pilots did not routinely use as much deflection as we do.

fordfan25
08-26-2005, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by Ploughman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"... I was pleasantly surprised to find, after clambering into the somewhat narrow cockpit, that the forward view was still rather better than was offered by the bf109, the Spitfire or the Mustang"

"..., but then I sat down." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


LMAO

corvette93
08-27-2005, 12:11 AM
Pulchritude is beauty.