PDA

View Full Version : I you had to choose, Bf109 or Fw190 what do you prefer?



DIRTY-MAC
05-28-2008, 02:16 PM
What do you prefer to fly in this game,
Bf109 or Fw190, and why?

Freiwillige
05-28-2008, 02:31 PM
BF-109's---If you cannot get your nose on them in the horizontal plane then you can use the high thrust and low weight of the 109 to beat your opponent in the vertical. And if you get into trouble you can spiral climb out of most situations.

FW-190's---Goering called them his deadly horsefly's (190's are tiny!) 190's can sledghammer anything they can bring their guns to bear on but only can survive at speed. Excellent roll rate good for a scissors fight but only average climb rates making it a bad choice in the vertical fight. And high energy loss in the horizontal turn makes it a bad dogfighter in general. But with speed kept high its deadly.

mmitch10
05-28-2008, 02:36 PM
If I'm flying for fun...109

If I'm flying to score victories...190

So I voted 109

TinyTim
05-28-2008, 02:47 PM
Completely depends on what the goal of flying is. For dueling (or flying when there is really low number (1 or 2) of reds on a server), 109 in most cases. For anything else, 190. (if there's dora I'll pick her over K4/G-10 in all cases)

I'd form a poll question differently: If game was altered so that you have to give up either entire 109 or entire 190 family, which one would you choose?

I'd keep 190s, that's how I voted.

SlickStick
05-28-2008, 02:50 PM
Although, I am usually found in one of the Spitfires, when I am flying Blue, I use the 109 for the times when dogfighting is going to be the most prevalent activity. The 109-G2 is a good Spitfire killer.

I use the 190-A9 with MK 108 wing cannons for bomber hunting and strict hit and run or B and Z tactics. She can dive fast and stable and take out or cripple most planes with a 1-2 second burst. That can equal many kills per sortie with 75-100% fuel. No problem that many of them are the "silent" landing kills. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I voted 190, because that is the ride I usually choose first on the Blue side.

Capt.LoneRanger
05-28-2008, 03:09 PM
Bf109 because it looks cool and I like the challenge. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

MB_Avro_UK
05-28-2008, 03:12 PM
Hi all,

If the setting is cockpit 'off' I would take the 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Why is the 190 view so restricted?

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

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

WeedEater9p
05-28-2008, 03:18 PM
Well the 109 has great climb,
the 190 has great dive,

You can run into the ground, but you can't run into the sky

DKoor
05-28-2008, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by mmitch10:
If I'm flying for fun...109

If I'm flying to score victories...190

So I voted 109 +1

JSG72
05-28-2008, 04:16 PM
I fly the FW.190 with 108s 98% of the time.

Over everything. Reason being I am a "Sturmpilot" Fan

This plane, as modelled in IL2. Has no armour and so behaves as a normal 190A-8 with the 108s. Probably like the Late '44 JG300 craft.

I sometimes like to fly the 109G-AS models as Top cover But they didn't do much. Bar getting chased and shot down by Escorts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I am afraid I am a "History Buff" as opposed to a Flight Sim aficionado. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

And the best of it is. I voted 109. As it is much closer to "The Birds"

Brain32
05-28-2008, 04:18 PM
FW190 hands down the only 109 I actually like to fly is the 109F4.
Yes I even actually take FW190A4 over the overhyped 109G2 anytime possible eventhough G2 is still OK but F4 beats it senselessly.
As you already know I consider late 109's complete useless POS and prefer to have a lot of them on server - when I fly Red, unfortunetly, seeing more than 3-4 on the server in the same time is an extreme rarity.
I actually can't imagine one single usable, positive thing about them in-game. I also both pitty and respect the poor fools(all 3 of them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif) that still try to fly them regulary...

cawimmer430
05-28-2008, 04:27 PM
The plane with the Benz engine in it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

M_Gunz
05-28-2008, 05:29 PM
I agree with TinyTim, it depends on the mission.

109 as a bayonet, 190 as a sabre.

Knife fight in a phone booth, I don't want the sabre.

F0_Dark_P
05-28-2008, 05:36 PM
The Bf109!

I have flown the 109 since day one this is the fighter that i learn to fly IL2 with!

She fits like a glove in my hand and i know her iside out thats it.

I just dont like flying the FW190 she just dont fit my hand, ..she is a sexy bird non the less and all my respect to her pilots http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

fordfan25
05-28-2008, 05:36 PM
depends what year and what moddles are avalible. what my game plan was as to what kind of mission and how i wanted to take it on. early war id take a g2 109 or g6 over a4 or a5 fw. those early FW's from my exp dont have a very large speed adv but are alot slower in excelaration. also depends on what is flying in said server. if there are a bunch of tiefires i will take the FW190. if im going exrteem alt 25k+ft i will often take the 109k. it of course is still slower than 47D but is close to 51 with a bit better climb and alot better turn at lower speeds. for 20k and lower i like the dora.now if you mean wich do i injoy fly'n the most. well the 190fw. the cockpit looks much much better

fordfan25
05-28-2008, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
FW190 hands down the only 109 I actually like to fly is the 109F4.
Yes I even actually take FW190A4 over the overhyped 109G2 anytime possible eventhough G2 is still OK but F4 beats it senselessly.
As you already know I consider late 109's complete useless POS and prefer to have a lot of them on server - when I fly Red, unfortunetly, seeing more than 3-4 on the server in the same time is an extreme rarity.
I actually can't imagine one single usable, positive thing about them in-game. I also both pitty and respect the poor fools(all 3 of them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif) that still try to fly them regulary... there great in a dog fight as long as there no spits around http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vike
05-28-2008, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
I actually can't imagine one single usable, positive thing about them in-game. I also both pitty and respect the poor fools(all 3 of them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif) that still try to fly them regulary...

With trim and combat flaps mastered correctly,you'll even find the K4-B4 almost "light" in maneuver.

You only need to train both with maneuver and accuracy when shooting.
After that,you should get any of the Late-109s able to:
-Out-turn/Out-fly/Out-gun many if not all enemies. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

Then,almost like you said:

I also both pitty and respect the poor fools(all 3000000000000 of them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif) that still try to fly Fw190 regulary against the SpitIX/Tempest... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Me109s,especially the Late-ones,are just a matter of (good) reflexes & habits http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

@+

PanzerAce
05-28-2008, 09:11 PM
Gimme' a -A5 or -D9 any day of the week.

stalkervision
05-28-2008, 10:09 PM
Low altitude or high altitade wise?

skarden
05-29-2008, 12:59 AM
I voted the FW-190 mainly because if your carefull and are patient you can score some good kills in it and it'll generaly bring you home most of the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif



Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Hi all,

If the setting is cockpit 'off' I would take the 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Why is the 190 view so restricted?

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

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Ah,I used to have that problem http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BWaltteri
05-29-2008, 02:46 AM
My first impression with FW: why does this thing not climb?

tragentsmith
05-29-2008, 03:19 AM
I take the FW and an wingman to cover me if I don't get the enemy on the first pass.

Feathered_IV
05-29-2008, 03:57 AM
The Wurger suxxors at 35000K. You don't win by flying under your opponents. If the 109 was good enough for Bubi, then it's good enough for me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

ViktorViktor
05-29-2008, 04:05 AM
What Brain32 said: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Though I do see several flying 109s online who do well with them, the FW-190 is my weapon of choice. I actually prefer the the Fw190-A9 over the D-9 so far; so far I do better with the A9 than the D-9.

If Hartman had been a 190-pilot I do believe he might have gotten 700 kills !

JG53Frankyboy
05-29-2008, 05:27 AM
Originally posted by BWaltteri:
My first impression with FW: why does this thing not climb?

well, there was a time in this game's history in that the 190s climbed better than the 109s http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

frior-one
05-29-2008, 05:47 AM
An interesting post, as I have not long moved from flying the 190 almost exclusivly to the 109. I flew the 190 for added fire power and the fact that it has wing mounted weapons. I just can not seem to get the hang of central mounted machine guns.
Other than hours of practice off line (which I am not able to do because flying time is limited and I enjoy flying with the "Dogz" (www.dangerdogz.com) on line.) Can any of the 109 jockeys offer advice on using the central mounted weapons.
Salute
frior_one (also known in the dogz as DD_Friar)
(the name change was down to a school boy spelling mistake..dont ask.....)

Wildnoob
05-29-2008, 07:58 AM
I usually use the FW-190. exceptions where until 1942, where the aircraft was not avaliable yet. at least in the sim terms if I are not wrong.

the FW-190 from A series have a fast level speed at lower and medium altitude, and the D9 model at all altitudes. especially the A series, have a excellent weapons set. this is very useful, as most times I have few seconds to use the guns, and in horizontal combat be able to take down a enemy aircaft to quickly leave the hot zone is very important. despite it's less guns, the D9 model still have a good weapons set for me. the FW-190 as also superior diving speed, and logic have great maneuverbility at high speeds. that's another great advantage. I just use energy tactics, and be able to attack a enemy aircraft in a high speed dive and leave the area is vital for me. the excellent dive capability can be also used on the defensive way. I already escape from pursuiters just by diving and using the combination of it's great power plant. until 1943 it's a superb way of avoid most enemy aircraft, especially on the eastern front. another strong point for the this aircraft is it's armor protection. the BF-109 have a liquid cooled engine, wich is very sensitivity to enemy fire in comparison to the FW-190's radial one. the armour around the engine is also larger in the FW-190.

I read the FW-190 from A series have 7 significant advantages over the BF-109 at lower and medium altitude. I just cited 3, and hope they would be in the ones I read. but, they don't cited then.

I just cited my personal view of the FW-190 advantages over the BF-109, and why I preffer it. the BF-109 sure have it's ones, and I have total respect to it.

in a sumary, I can say that for me the FW-190 is ideal aircraft for combat using energy tactics.

Sub_Boy
05-29-2008, 08:34 AM
Both planes have thier strenghts, and weaknesses, but the 109's are more hazerdous, and tricky in take off's, and landing's.
Once airbourne though I think the 109 has the advantage.

Cheers.

Chruisto
05-29-2008, 09:08 AM
Fw190 Because it has a BMW Engine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Xiolablu3
05-29-2008, 09:47 AM
I like the 109E, 109F4 and G2, awesome planes, but the Fw190 is my preferable ride.

p51srule
05-29-2008, 11:05 AM
It depends on on what mode they are i like the late mode 109s but I like the early 190s so im in quite a pickel http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif. but Im mostly going for the bf109.

foxyboy1964
05-29-2008, 11:36 AM
The 190, because my gunnery sucks.

WOLFMondo
05-29-2008, 11:48 AM
190 here. More durable, easier to fly, vastly superior firepower. I find it a better 'team'plane as well. I agree with the statements on the 109F but late 109's I really don't like, I'd always take a Dora or A9.

crucislancer
05-29-2008, 12:28 PM
I like the 109 over the 190, simply because the 109 is easier for me to handle, with the E and F marks being my favorite.

I'm sure if I took more time to get into the 190 I would learn to love it more, and I do love the firepower of that plane.

TTU_Phoenix
05-29-2008, 03:25 PM
I'm a 109 man myself. Learned to shoot on it (took a while http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) but I got pretty good with it. And friar, as to using centrally mounted guns, I find that the best thing to do is to change aiming points. With wing mounted guns you tend to hit the wings of the target. With central guns always shoot for the body, in fact, I usually aim for the base of the tail, as there is almost always a gas tank there. For maximu damage, try to stay away from shooting at the outer parts of the wings, it doesn't usually do enough damage to make it worth the ammo.

Schwarz.13
05-29-2008, 06:18 PM
I can't make up my mind! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

furyan65
05-29-2008, 07:11 PM
Easy.

190 anyday!

mortoma
05-29-2008, 07:21 PM
The 190, because at the higher speeds I like to maintain the 190 actually turns substantially better than the 109. At least in this sim. I hate that high speed elevator lock!! And even if you B-n-Z you still have to turn at times. Or at least follow a plane though a quarter turn or so. To do that is not turn fighting.

ViktorViktor
05-30-2008, 12:33 AM
Sub_boy wrote:

Both planes have thier strenghts, and weaknesses, but the 109's are more hazerdous, and tricky in take off's, and landing's.

I disagree with this. The 190 is much less forgiving than the 109 during take-offs and landings (in IL2). Additionally, I have found that after lay-offs from playing the game, it is much easier to get my 'touch' back flying 109s than flying 190s. Aiming with the 109 is easier as well, but it lacks the 190's firepower.

Kurfurst__
05-30-2008, 12:37 AM
109 (who would have guessed? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Back in the beta days, I eagerly awaited the 190, but the unforgiving nature of the 190 compared to the extremely good natured 109 quickly whipped me back to the skinny one.

TinyTim
05-30-2008, 02:26 AM
My feeling still is that pure fighter versions of 190A should fly more like a Ki-84 compared to how they fly now, but hey it's just my *feeling* so feel free to tear me apart for it.

FatCat_99
05-30-2008, 04:49 AM
Hard to chose between two great planes. They are completely different so it depend on a mood which one to chose. Generally Bf109 is for fun and FW190 for killing.

My favorites are 109F4 and 190A5.


Originally posted by TinyTim:
My feeling still is that pure fighter versions of 190A should fly more like a Ki-84 compared to how they fly now, but hey it's just my *feeling* so feel free to tear me apart for it.

Speed of FW is ok, climb is ok, turn rates acceptable, roll is ok so what else is left?

FC

TinyTim
05-30-2008, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:
Hard to chose between two great planes. They are completely different so it depend on a mood which one to chose. Generally Bf109 is for fun and FW190 for killing.

My favorites are 109F4 and 190A5.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
My feeling still is that pure fighter versions of 190A should fly more like a Ki-84 compared to how they fly now, but hey it's just my *feeling* so feel free to tear me apart for it.

Speed of FW is ok, climb is ok, turn rates acceptable, roll is ok so what else is left?

FC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't forget you are stating this after a few years of playing this sim, and getting utterly used to it. Climb ok? Are you joking? SpitV as it is modelled here outclimbs the A4, when A3 should outclimb the SpitV with ease. By british tests:"best climbing speeds are comparable, but Fw190 climbs at considerably steeper angle." In PF, this is exactly vice versa. I refuse to believe that IRL you had to "extend" across half of the "map" running for tens of miles to gain enough separation in vertical to return and attack again. Outclimbing a SpitV in a A4 should look somehow similar to outclimbing a Yak-1b in a G2 (or F4). If spit wants to get a firing solution on climbing Fw, he must pitch harder, which means stall. We don't see this here.

I refuse to believe Fw190s ability to dogfight from equal initial position was that bad (having altitude advantage as a must is just a bad excuse for poorly performing plane IMO, as with enough altitude advantage in any plane you are in advantageous position versus any other plane).

Still, I believe Fw190 in IL2 is the best plane to be in when you have alt advantage. High dive speed, nice zoom climb, lotsa guns, good high speed maneouverability. People say: use this and you'll do fine. We are not talking about how to use Fw effectively in this sim, that's been debated over and over again, and is not a problem. We are comparing "our" Fw to what it should be compared to historical counterpart.

furyan65
05-30-2008, 05:32 AM
Galland was known to have asked the heads of the Luftwaffe to completely forget making anymore 109's and to concentrate entirely on Focke Wolf 190's.

Also the 190 had a ***** weapon list. That b1tch could bust anything, come on guys!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

FatCat_99
05-30-2008, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
Climb ok? Are you joking? SpitV as it is modelled here outclimbs the A4, when A3 should outclimb the SpitV with ease. By british tests:"best climbing speeds are comparable, but Fw190 climbs at considerably steeper angle." In PF, this is exactly vice versa. I refuse to believe that IRL you had to "extend" across half of the "map" running for tens of miles to gain enough separation in vertical to return and attack again. Outclimbing a SpitV in a A4 should look somehow similar to outclimbing a Yak-1b in a G2 (or F4). If spit wants to get a firing solution on climbing Fw, he must pitch harder, which means stall. We don't see this here.


I'm not joking, climb rates of FW in game are acceptable, you can find worser and better RL examples but in general things are fine in my book.
Compare this with sim:
http://img164.imagevenue.com/loc712/th_47012_Fw190A3_122_712lo.jpg (http://img164.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=47012_Fw190A3_122_712lo.jpg)

In other words if FW190A4 doesn't outeverything SpitV in game that doesn't mean that FW is porked, you should explore another possibility. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If you visit MW site and check different SpitMkV versions you will find everything, planes that are complete POS to planes that are very good.

It all depend on boost used and quality of tested plane.

You can't make general conclusions on just one test. Fact is that FW in game climb as good as German test shows.

FC

furyan65
05-30-2008, 06:15 AM
^ Lol yeah irl the 190 out flew the Mark V Spit in everything bar tight turns!

Kettenhunde
05-30-2008, 06:18 AM
Compare this with sim:


That is the FW-190Aa3. It is the export version given to Turkey and not a Luftwaffe service variant, btw.

All the best,

Crumpp

M_Gunz
05-30-2008, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
Climb ok? Are you joking? SpitV as it is modelled here outclimbs the A4, when A3 should outclimb the SpitV with ease. By british tests:"best climbing speeds are comparable, but Fw190 climbs at considerably steeper angle."

Please TT, the comparison you quote was between a 190A-3 running at 1.42ATA vs the second Spit V
off the line in been used hard condition while we have a derated A-4 and Spit V that is a mid-42
nodel new with better engine.

There's been text posted at SimHQ and here by the guy who flew the Spit and he described that
the FW pilot and he flew the climb compare at 240-250mph which is when he realized that the
other pilot was better suited than he to fly that plane since that is how the FW's were being
flown in the channel fights. He had been severely disappointed at not getting to try the FW.
So try climbing both at 400kph, a realistic FW combat speed as used in realistic combat compare
tests as see what you get for results.

TinyTim
05-30-2008, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:
I'm not joking, climb rates of FW in game are acceptable, you can find worser and better RL examples but in general things are fine in my book.
Compare this with sim:
http://img164.imagevenue.com/loc712/th_47012_Fw190A3_122_712lo.jpg (http://img164.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=47012_Fw190A3_122_712lo.jpg)

In other words if FW190A4 doesn't outeverything SpitV in game that doesn't mean that FW is porked, you should explore another possibility. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Looks like I haven't been clear enough (or you haven't read my post carefully). Thing is I think I know very well on how to use the 190 online. I am fairly convinced that it is one of the most potent air to air planes, as modelled in this sim. On some maps I even refuse to fly it, being "to easy" (like channel '42 or Eastern front 1942) and choosing an F4 instead. It is without any question in my mind the best plane by far to be in when having altitude advantage. It is a plane that enables you to rack up highest amount of kills per sortie while exposing yourself to enemy fire the least.

Again: I do not seek an advice on how to fly 190 in '46 online because I assume I don't need one. The question that bothers me is, was 190 really that bad IRL (!!!) in a close in dogfighting? Afterall, this is a sim and our tendency should be to have planes behaving as historical as possible. If that's not the case I'd rather go and play crimson skies.

Anyway, I don't think this debate will bear any fruit, because at the end it comes down to the fact, that turn fighters as modelled in '46 are also energy fighters, while those planes that were considered energy fighters IRL, suck at either angles or energy fighting in 46 (Fw190, P47) which forces them to have substantial energy advantage over opponent before engaging in order to have the slightest hope of succsess. (Let me stress again that BnZ and energy dogfighting are two completely different things - IRL 190 could dogfight contemporary spitfire without initial E advantage given he kept the fight in vertical, in PF it can't. It can only BnZ it.)


Originally posted by FatCat_99:
If you visit MW site and check different SpitMkV versions you will find everything, planes that are complete POS to planes that are very good.

It all depend on boost used and quality of tested plane.

Agreed. I generalised to much.


Originally posted by FatCat_99:You can't make general conclusions on just one test. Fact is that FW in game climb as good as German test shows.

The question remains: do all other planes as well? I believe this community has come to a consent that in general average plane in IL2 1946 climbs 20% better than it should... It's a major drawback if 190 climbs perfectly according to German tests.


Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Please TT, the comparison you quote was between a 190A-3 running at 1.42ATA vs the second Spit V
off the line in been used hard condition while we have a derated A-4 and Spit V that is a mid-42
nodel new with better engine.


Ah, true, I forgot about the frankenstein performance of our MkVb... I take it back (the part about climbing that is).

Just crossed my mind: do you guys think that J2M5 would do any worse online if its maneouverability was reduced? I don't think its K/D ratio would drop significantly, simply because experienced players should stick to climb/dive (ie. vertical or energy) fighting at first place. Maneouverability can only help you when in trouble. Like DKoor once said: No one in sain mind will turn when he has other options. The case is (IMO) exactly the same with 190.

badatflyski
05-30-2008, 10:47 AM
Parts of the rapport spit5 vs 190:

the rate of climb up to180000 ft (5,486.40m) under maximum continuous cimbing conditions at 1.35ata boost;2450rpm ,164mph (263.93km/h) is between 3000 and 32500ft/min (15.25m/s and 16.51 m/s) .

the initial rateof climb when pulling op from level flight at fast cruising speed is high and the angle steep, and from a dive is phenomenal.


190 vs Mk5B

The 190 was copared from an operationnal sqdrn for speed and all-round maneuvrability at height op to 25000ft(7,620.00).
The 190 is superior in speed at all heights,and the approximative differences are as follows.


-at 1000ft (304.80m) the 190 is 25-30mph 40.23-48.28km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 3000ft (914.40m) the 190 is 30-35mph (48.28-56.33km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 5000ft (1524.00m) the 190 is 25mph (40.23km/h) faster than the spit5
-at 9000ft (2743.20m) the 190 is 25-30mph (40.23-48.28km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 15000ft (4572.00m) the 190 is 20mph (32.2km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 18000ft (5486.40m) the 190 is 20mph (32.2km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 21000ft (6400.80m) the 190 is 25mph (40.23km/h) faster than the spit5.
at 25000ft (7620.00m) the 190 is 20-25mph (32.2- 40.23km/h) faster than the spit5

Climb:

The climb of the 190 is superior to that of the spit5b at all heights.
The best speeds for climbing are approximately tha same, but the angle of the 190
is considerably steeper. Under max continuous climbing conditions the climb of the 190
is about 450ft/min (2.286m/s) better up to 25000ft.
With both aircraft flying at high cruising speed and then pulling up into a climb, the superior climb of the 190
is even more marked. When both aircraft are pulled up into a climb from a dive, the 190 draws away very rapidly
and the pilot of the spit has no hope of catching it.

Dive:
Comparative dives between the two aircrafts have shown that the 190 can leave the spit5 with ease, particularly during the initial stages.


Maneuvrability:
Tha maneuvrability of the 190 is better than that of the spitfire5 except in turning circles,
when the spit5 can quite easily out-turn it. The 190 has better acceleration under all conditions of lfight and this must be obviously be useful during combat.
etc...etc...




Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Please TT, the comparison you quote was between a 190A-3 running at 1.42ATA vs the second Spit V
off the line in been used hard condition while we have a derated A-4 and Spit V that is a mid-42
nodel new with better engine.

There's been text posted at SimHQ and here by the guy who flew the Spit and he described that
the FW pilot and he flew the climb compare at 240-250mph which is when he realized that the
other pilot was better suited than he to fly that plane since that is how the FW's were being
flown in the channel fights. He had been severely disappointed at not getting to try the FW.
So try climbing both at 400kph, a realistic FW combat speed as used in realistic combat compare
tests as see what you get for results.

That's a veyr lame excuse M_Gunz!

both aircrafts were in operationnal condition, so saying that the spit5 had a engine with lot of fatigue ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif ...how can you tell that?
can you give the flightbook of this airframe ? it's the only way to know how much hours had this engine since the last overhaul.
And what about the 190, how was it's engine?

And about the rest: i can only invite you to read the report here above.

For tiny-Tin:
yes the 190 is porcked in this game:

1st : the bmw801 is modelled as a carburator engine, but all the merlins except one are modelled with injection! (first cause of power loss)(what the http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif )

2nd: all the spit have a kind of magic parameter that is called "engine acceleration", this little parameter has 2 fonctions: it allows the spit (don't say plane cause the spits are the only one with this kind of high parameter except the tempest) to accelerate and it's second role is to maintain the RPM of the engine. So, the spit have this parameter on 6, the 190 on 3 (like a ghnome rhone with 600hp!), the rest of the fighters are on 4 except the fighters with merlin (or packard) engines(6).(second cause of power loss)
Something wrong here? no?


3rd: the 190a5 is modelled with a climb max continuous climb rate of 14m/s and a climb speed of 290km/h and now for the fun ,the spit5: 16m/s climb and 260km/h climb.
Something wrong here again, if you read the repport, don't you think?

So, the 190 has a tractor engine with absolutely no acceleration (the lowest of all the fighters), has the ability to lose it's RPM like a carb engine and has the wrong flight data !

So, abolutly no, the 190 is not porcked!

Xiolablu3
05-30-2008, 11:14 AM
The FW190 will never fly like a Ki84 according to the data I just looked up. (pls note if I am wrong)

The FW190A6 wing loading is about 45 lbs I believe, whereas the Ki84 is around 36lbs.

Stall speed is also higher in the Fw190.


The fact is that if the Fw190 is not careful then even a Spitfire V in going to turn inside him and get a shot.

If the Fw190 allows himself to be drawn in to a close-in dogfight/turning contest where its all about who can outturn the other, then the Spit is going to be in a position to fire very quickly.

Yes the Fw190 holds most of the cards over the SPitfire V, but he still has to be careful.

Eric Brown sums it up very well and this is the exact situation I see in the sim between the SpitV and Fw190A4 :-

'It was concluded that the Fw 190 pilot trying to "mix it" with a Spitfire in the classic fashion of steep turning was doomed, for at any speed - even below the German fighter's stalling speed - it would be out-turned by its British opponent. Of course, the Luftwaffe was aware of this fact and a somewhat odd style of dogfighting evolved in which the Fw 190 pilots endeavored to keep on the vertical plane by zooms and dives, while their Spitfire-mounted antagonists tried everything in the book to draw them on to the horizontal. If the German pilot lost his head and failed to resist the temptation to try a horizontal pursuit curve on a Spitfire, as likely as not, before he could recover the speed lost in a steep turn he would find another Spitfire turning inside him! On the other hand, the German pilot who kept zooming up and down was usually the recipient of only difficult deflection shots of more than 30 deg. The Fw 190 had tremendous initial acceleration in a dive but it was extremely vulnerable during a pull-out, recovery having to be quite progressive with care not to kill the speed by "sinking".(Wings of the Luftwaffe, Capt. Eric Brown)'

Xiolablu3
05-30-2008, 11:19 AM
By the way, do you guys think the Bf109 pilot at the end of this clip looks like Heinz Knocke?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt0m85QKeDc&feature=related

Manu-6S
05-30-2008, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by badatflyski:

1st : the bmw801 is modelled as a carburator engine, but all the merlins except one are modelled with injection! (first cause of power loss)(what the http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif )

2nd: all the spit have a kind of magic parameter that is called "engine acceleration", this little parameter has 2 fonctions: it allows the spit (don't say plane cause the spits are the only one with this kind of high parameter except the tempest) to accelerate and it's second role is to maintain the RPM of the engine. So, the spit have this parameter on 6, the 190 on 3 (like a ghnome rhone with 600hp!), the rest of the fighters are on 4 except the fighters with merlin (or packard) engines(6).(second cause of power loss)
Something wrong here? no?


3rd: the 190a5 is modelled with a climb max continuous climb rate of 14m/s and a climb speed of 290km/h and now for the fun ,the spit5: 16m/s climb and 260km/h climb.
Something wrong here again, if you read the repport, don't you think?

So, the 190 has a tractor engine with absolutely no acceleration (the lowest of all the fighters), has the ability to lose it's RPM like a carb engine and has the wrong flight data !

So, abolutly no, the 190 is not porcked!

If you look at parameters Ki84s and Antons get the same Engine with different prop.

Ingame they react in a relly different way (speaking about accelleration here)

What do you think about?

Xiolablu3
05-30-2008, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by badatflyski:

1st : the bmw801 is modelled as a carburator engine, but all the merlins except one are modelled with injection! (first cause of power loss)(what the http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif )

2nd: all the spit have a kind of magic parameter that is called "engine acceleration", this little parameter has 2 fonctions: it allows the spit (don't say plane cause the spits are the only one with this kind of high parameter except the tempest) to accelerate and it's second role is to maintain the RPM of the engine. So, the spit have this parameter on 6, the 190 on 3 (like a ghnome rhone with 600hp!), the rest of the fighters are on 4 except the fighters with merlin (or packard) engines(6).(second cause of power loss)
Something wrong here? no?


3rd: the 190a5 is modelled with a climb max continuous climb rate of 14m/s and a climb speed of 290km/h and now for the fun ,the spit5: 16m/s climb and 260km/h climb.
Something wrong here again, if you read the repport, don't you think?

So, the 190 has a tractor engine with absolutely no acceleration (the lowest of all the fighters), has the ability to lose it's RPM like a carb engine and has the wrong flight data !

So, abolutly no, the 190 is not porcked!

If you look at parameters Ki84s and Antons get the same Engine with different prop.

Ingame they react in a relly different way (speaking about accelleration here)

What do you think about? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Remember that the Fw190 is heavy for a fighter, its around the US fighter weights rather than the lighter 109/Spit/Zero weights.

Operational weights according to web pages :-

Ki84 - 7900lbs

Fw190A8 - 10,000lbs

The Dora is heavier again thanks to its bomber engine.

badatflyski
05-30-2008, 04:39 PM
Manu6S: indeed! you're right, the Ha21 having 200rpms more, but the main difference is indeed the prop. Did you noticed that the 8 type is not explained http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Xio: standart fighter config for a a8 was 9452Pounds exactly (reafering to the A8 manual)

The A4 is modelled with a take off weight of4200 kg the A8 with 4278.
tha ki84 -4278 also.

The 10000pounds are for a Jabo-mode.
Anyway, it was heavy but still more compact than the p51d for example at least in the game, the p51d having 4620kg at takeoff.

Stil, the pb is in the game data,...again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FatCat_99
05-30-2008, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by badatflyski:
The A4 is modelled with a take off weight of4200

That's not used for calculations of FM, FW190A4 have 3952kg in default configuration and full fuel tank.

FC

furyan65
05-30-2008, 07:55 PM
-at 1000ft (304.80m) the 190 is 25-30mph 40.23-48.28km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 3000ft (914.40m) the 190 is 30-35mph (48.28-56.33km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 5000ft (1524.00m) the 190 is 25mph (40.23km/h) faster than the spit5
-at 9000ft (2743.20m) the 190 is 25-30mph (40.23-48.28km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 15000ft (4572.00m) the 190 is 20mph (32.2km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 18000ft (5486.40m) the 190 is 20mph (32.2km/h) faster than the spit5.
-at 21000ft (6400.80m) the 190 is 25mph (40.23km/h) faster than the spit5.
at 25000ft (7620.00m) the 190 is 20-25mph (32.2- 40.23km/h) faster than the spit5

Yeah but whats 20-30mph doing to prove in a dogfight. Its not that much is it? I mean being 25mph faster doesnt mean the 190 has the upper hand in that respect as that difference is so small.

Airmail109
05-30-2008, 10:09 PM
The Antons are ghey purely because of their acceleration and climbrate, the 109s better for midwar at medium altitude.

The 190D is a whole new ballgame though, still doesnt have the best climbrate but its better and oh boy is it fast. As well as well armed, nice harmonized controls, good acceleration, great highspeed handling and roll rate.

F19_Orheim
05-31-2008, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mmitch10:
If I'm flying for fun...109

If I'm flying to score victories...190

So I voted 109 +1 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1

DKoor
05-31-2008, 01:46 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
By the way, do you guys think the Bf109 pilot at the end of this clip looks like Heinz Knocke?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt0m85QKeDc&feature=related I also think so, however I can't tell for sure.

LovroSL
05-31-2008, 05:53 AM
fw190- good for killing
but: hard to fly, takes forever getting to altitude, not really all that fun

bf109: not as good as 190
but: fun to fly, superb handling at whatever you do (except for the elevator at 550+ kmh.
To be good with it you just have to be good- there is no recipe how to succed in it (like: "just BnZ in a 190 and you are safe"). You will have breathtaking awe moments like looking at your enemy 30m away, parallel to you in a vertical at 40kmh IAS

So I picked the 109. Get that bird a decent gunsight, some rudder trim (my wrist hurts because of the rudder on long hauls- even if you go at cruise speed you still have to correct it) and it would be even better.

Xiolablu3
05-31-2008, 05:09 PM
Awe man the FW190 is AWESOME fun to fly, especially the A versions.

Jaggy.
05-31-2008, 05:20 PM
Had to go with the FW-190.

In love with the A9 version with wings cannons. Just insane firepower on that badboy. Personally, I always lean towards firepower over agility and protection, not always good obviously.

ImpStarDuece
06-01-2008, 02:19 AM
FW 190. Simple.

When I fly, I want to shoot aircraft down. With 4 x 20 mm, great speed and amazing manouverability at high speeds, nothing comes close until the Tempest and Ki-84 are introduced.

If I fly the 109, its because I want to dogfight, not necessarily win the fight.

Ronbo3
06-02-2008, 09:56 AM
I picked FW as well, i just like the diving acceleration and plenty of firepower.

Question i have is, and probably talked about to death: On paper, the A9 looks like the best of the FW series, but its not a production aircraft that i can tell. So why is it available? i know there are some russian birds that fit the same bill.

I do like the mystique of the 109 and still fly it.

luftluuver
06-02-2008, 10:08 AM
A-9 production started in April 1944 with some 600+ being manufactured. Also many A-8s were upgraded to A-9 status with the A-9's engine being installed.

Schwarz.13
06-02-2008, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by Ronbo3:
Question i have is, and probably talked about to death: On paper, the A9 looks like the best of the FW series, but its not a production aircraft that i can tell. So why is it available?

To my knowledge the A9 was indeed a production model it's just the A8 was the variant built in the greatest numbers.

According to Donald Caldwell, JG301, around September-December 1944, gave up all its Bf109s "for Fw 190A-8/R11s and Fw 190A-9/R11s, which were fully equipped for operations in bad weather."

R11 meant all-weather fighter with a heated canopy and PKS 12 radio navigation equipment.

Ronbo3
06-02-2008, 10:38 AM
What is the book used for that production number? I have only 1 book that states it was in production low numbers starting in 44. I guess the A-8 overshadows the A9 in examples known due to production. Makes me mad i dont have it out of 4 popular books beyond naming it basically...

luftluuver
06-02-2008, 10:52 AM
Ron look here:

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biijg301.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bijg26.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biijg26.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bijg2.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biiijg2.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bijg54.html
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bivjg54.html

Spinnetti
06-03-2008, 08:28 PM
I like them both, but in the hunt, the 109 is bringing a knife to a gun fight. Its hard to run out of ammo in the 190, and just a little tap from the 20's is all you need. I like the A4 the best all around and the A6 for bringing down the heavies.. The later birds feel too heavy.

Treetop64
06-03-2008, 11:26 PM
Remarkable that after 100 votes, it is virtually split even between the two!

> Go with the 109 because it's easier to fly, and - except for the Emil - the weapons require no convergence.

> Go with the 190 because of it's excellent handling and powerful weapons.

Good question, and difficult decision.

Though I'm vastly more experienced in the 109s, particularly the F models, I went with the 190s.

Xiolablu3
06-04-2008, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by skarden:
I voted the FW-190 mainly because if your carefull and are patient you can score some good kills in it and it'll generaly bring you home most of the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Hi all,

If the setting is cockpit 'off' I would take the 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Why is the 190 view so restricted?

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

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Ah,I used to have that problem http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats lame, why not just get rid of it altogther and fly wonderwoman? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Stay on the level playing field, what oyu are doing is nothing more than cheating/hacking.

Bremspropeller
06-04-2008, 10:17 AM
Fw 190, any mission, any time.

zardozid
06-04-2008, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Treetop64:
Remarkable that after 100 votes, it is virtually split even between the two!

.



just like real life... I remember reading that German pilots where pretty divided on which one was their favorite.

chunkydora
06-04-2008, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by cawimmer430:
The plane with the Benz engine in it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

I love that painting. Do you know of any site I could download a hi-res version?

HerrGraf
06-04-2008, 09:42 PM
Sounds much like the P47 vs P51 debate, or the Yak vs LA debate. What works best with your flying style is what will be your favorite ride.
It is interesting that each of these groups has 1 radial engine vs 1 inline engine.

BWaltteri
06-05-2008, 02:09 AM
Tight poll!

It's 50/50 at the moment.

I voted for the 109 but maybe I would have chosen 190 if I was fighting in the Western Front.

I remember the days of Lucasfilm's Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, and those days I always preferred the 190 because it was more effective against the bombardiroshiki.

cawimmer430
06-05-2008, 04:10 AM
Originally posted by chunkydora:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by cawimmer430:
The plane with the Benz engine in it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

I love that painting. Do you know of any site I could download a hi-res version? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi,

I scanned it from a magazine I have. The original can be blown up quite a bit so I'll see what I can do. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif