PDA

View Full Version : FM of the BF110G2 in relation to other planes



Atzebrueck
01-09-2005, 11:37 AM
I'm just copying my text from another thread, because I want to discuss the flightmodel of the 110 a bit. In my opinion there is a lot that has to be corrected.

About it's turnrate
----------------------------------------
Bf 110 G-2: 2*1475 PS; 38,37 m²:
empty (5094 kg): 133 kg/m² - 1,73 kg/PS
take-off (7300 kg): 190 kg/m² - 2,47 kg/PS
max (9390 kg): 245 kg/m² - 3,18 kg/PS

P-38 J: 2*1425 PS; 30,42 m²:
empty (5797 kg): 191 kg/m² (+44%) - 2,03 kg/PS (+17%)
take-off (7936 kg): 261 kg/m² (+37%) - 2,78 kg/PS (+13%)
max (9798 kg): 322 kg/m² (+31%) - 3,44 kg/PS (+8%)

As you can see the Lightning has a wingloading that is ~37% higher and a powerloading which is ~13% higher than that of the 110 (the performance of the Bf 110 seen as 100%). There is no way, it should be able to outturn a 110.

Yet, in game I get a different impression.
I made a short test:
Krim, sealevel, 110% throttle, 100% fuel, 3*360? with constant speed and alt:
Bf 110 G-2 needs ~30 seconds for a 360? turn
P-38 J needs ~24 seconds for a 360? turn

30 seconds with that wing-/powerloading is way too long. Additionally, the planes in FB tend to turn faster than during real life tests.
----------------------------------------


max. allowed dive-speed:
----------------------------------------
http://vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/brett.jpg

The sign at the middle of the panel shows a security value. It's strange, that in FB parts start to come off at exact this 700 km/h IAS.

To compare that with the P51D:
On the left side of its cockpit, there is a sign, indicating 440kt (815 km/h) below 5000ft (1524m) as the max. allowed dive-speed. While I tested it, I achieved 524kt (970km/h) IAS at 2395 ft (730m) without damage.
That's ~20% above the limit.

Now, back to the 110: 120% of 700km/h IAS would be 840km/h IAS. I guess 800-825 km/h should be used as the limit.

Other 2mots of FB I tested:
speed in IAS, at which control surfaces start be ripped off (beginning at 5km, diving at ~80?):
A20: ~740 km/h
B25: ~720 km/h
Beaufighter: ~760 km/h
He111: ~720 km/h
Me110: ~710 km/h

A heavy fighter/destroyer is worse than bombers. That doesn't make sense.
----------------------------------------


In FB the 110's topspeed, climbrate, turning ability, roll, acceleration, high-alt performance, elevator effectiveness etc. are among the worst of all planes.
As far as I have heard/read, in reality only the stick forces and rollrate have been reported as bad.
In my opinion at least its turnrate, acceleration and dive speed limit should be a lot better than they are at the moment.
Additionally the high altitude performance should be checked.

JG5_UnKle
01-09-2005, 12:25 PM
Yes the dive speed is now worse than it was in prior versions. I think 3.02 and 3.03 have worse dive speeds but didn't test very much.

It is easy to lose control surfaces at any speed above 650Kph. It wasn't like this in the past but if this is accurate or not I couldn't say - but it did change; I'm pretty sure of that.

Atzebrueck
01-09-2005, 12:37 PM
turn-rate of the Beaufighter:

Beaufighter Mk21: 2*1725 PS; 46,73 m²:
empty (7100 kg): 152 kg/m² (+14% compared to the Bf 110) - 2,06 kg/PS (+19%)
take-off ?
max (11530 kg): 247 kg/m² (+1%) - 3,34 kg/PS (+5%)

Still, the Beaufighter needs 23 seconds for completing a 360? turn, 7 seconds less than the 110.
7 seconds faster ... that's a lot for a plane with worse wing-/powerloading.

NorrisMcWhirter
01-09-2005, 12:51 PM
Hi,

This is something I've questioned before; the comparison between Beau and 110 but there appeared to be no information forthcoming.

Be nice to know how they really stacked up.

Cheers,
Norris

Atzebrueck
01-09-2005, 12:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Hi,

This is something I've questioned before; the comparison between Beau and 110 but there appeared to be no information forthcoming.

Be nice to know how they really stacked up.

Cheers,
Norris <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just looking at the wingloading and the powerloading of both planes should indicate that the turn rate should be similar, if not in favour for the 110.

I'm not discussing about 10 km/h, 1 m/s or 1 second turn rate like in other "whiner-threads" but about a relation that seems to be way off:
7 seconds difference between the Beaufighter and the 110, 6 seconds more than the P38 ... that's just wrong. We don't have to wait on real life data to know that.

23 to 30 seconds ... that's like the P51 having a top speed of 537 km/h instead of 700. Imagine how much whining that would cause http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

noshens
01-09-2005, 03:08 PM
did you include horsepower into your calculations?

jurinko
01-09-2005, 04:00 PM
its true that 110 flies like with 2x deccelerated time..

Kwiatos
01-09-2005, 04:37 PM
I think Bf 110 G-2 has one of the best FM in FB/PF. I really like these plane in these game and i think its the best modelled Bf 110 from all simulators. These plane have own historically correct + and -. Pity that these is only 1 late version and we dont have earlier versions. Insted we have many others no needed planes like Bf 109Z or similiar.

meh_cd
01-09-2005, 06:02 PM
I've always read that the 110 wasn't that bad of a turner, just that the roll was atrocious.

Ugly_Kid
01-09-2005, 11:28 PM
Accodring to Wagner's book about Kurt Tank the original FW-190 with smaller wing had worse turn rate to Me 110. When they introduced the 18.609 sq.m wing o the FW they got to the same turning performance which was considered sufficient.

JG53Hunter
01-10-2005, 12:55 AM
It was from 2.00 to 2.01 when the Bf110 was serious downgraded. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
I just can hope that some of you guys dig some information about its real performance out.

Abbuzze
01-10-2005, 01:42 AM
I read the result of a british test.
It ist from a book about the desert war (don´t know the british titel).
Result: at SL the Beaufighter was faster than the 110, at higher altitude the 110 was the faster plane, and the 110 outturned the Beaufighter at ALL alts... Tests were done by a nightfightersquad. It´s pity but no versions where mentioned... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

pourshot
01-10-2005, 01:56 AM
So wich plane is porked the Beaufighter or the 110?

Kwiatos
01-10-2005, 04:43 AM
I think 110 is ok others are overmodelled expecially bombers. I think engine of FB/PF is not good for modelling FM of bombers.

jugent
01-10-2005, 04:47 AM
Face the facts german planes are not Maddox favourites. Does it surprise you?

Mil-Falcon
01-10-2005, 05:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kwiatos:
I think 110 is ok others are overmodelled expecially bombers. I think engine of FB/PF is not good for modelling FM of bombers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


The BF110 was not a bomber. They was a heavy fighter.
And later a destroyer plane.

Recon_609IAP
01-10-2005, 06:03 AM
So, just curious, do we base the FM off 'relationships to other planes' ?

I always thought it had it's own FM... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

KGr.HH-Sunburst
01-10-2005, 06:05 AM
I for one love to fly the 110 even with its current DM/FM ,the 110 is a total cr@p plane
from 1942 and up.
its nose heavy ,accelerates like a snail in the mud ,its slow ,it doesnt climb ,it cannot outdive anything ,yaks keep up with you in dives and break up later ,but the worst of all is the roll rate ,B17s B25s B29s ,they all outroll the 110 somehow lol and A20s can DF 110s just fine bcus they are just as fast and turn and roll better LOL

but i do love it because of its brute firepower and looks.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

i have many online hours in the 110 and my kill ratio is about the same as the 109s of the same era.

Atzebrueck
01-10-2005, 06:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kwiatos:
I think Bf 110 G-2 has one of the best FM in FB/PF. I really like these plane in these game and i think its the best modelled Bf 110 from all simulators. These plane have own historically correct + and -. Pity that these is only 1 late version and we dont have earlier versions. Insted we have many others no needed planes like Bf 109Z or similiar. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why don't you post some facts, then. Your imagination or opinion is not enough here.
In relation to all other 2 engined planes, the 110 has the worst FM, by far.

Even if seen as an absolute value, 30 seconds is way off.

Arguments like "I can shoot every plane down while flying the 110." don't matter at all.
Everything that counts is, that planes, being reported as turning worse than the 110, need <span class="ev_code_RED">7 seconds less</span> for 360?.

And saying, that two engined planes should fly much worse, just because they have two engine nacelles doesn't make sense, either. They have to follow the same laws of physics as single engined planes, too.

I'll repeat it again: What would you say, if the P51 would have a topspeed of 537 km/h ?

Actually, I can't remember a single plane of IL2/FB/AEP/PF, that has been as undermodeled as the 110!

JG53Frankyboy
01-10-2005, 06:20 AM
some few notes:
- the Bf110 was from begin called a "Zerst¶rer" (destroyer). the germans used that term for a heavy fighter.

- the Bf110G came in service january 1943 !

- the MK108 in Bf110G came very late 1943

LeadSpitter_
01-10-2005, 08:48 AM
you seem to fail to mention that the p38s online all are using 25% fuel, small maps no need for 100 fuel.

you guys keep pestering oleg to give 25 fuel performance turn times with 100% fuel test results.

Do you understand that the lightning fuel capacity was much much greater then the bf110s being effected more with full fuel load becuase of weight?

The thing i notice most about the bf110 is its very capable of dogfighting and hitting long range shots with laserbeam accuracy of shakeless recoiless 2 20mm cannon and it can be a very good turn fighter.

With payload 2 500kgs its fm seems completely killed the p38 with 2 1000lbs seems alright but still noticable decrease in performance as for rocket racks they kill the fm of the p38 me262 with the rockets also.

i think the bf110 should not be effected so much by carring 2 500kgs or the lighting with rocket trees same with the me262 with rockets which were very low drag.

But you wanting us aircraft wwhich are using 25fuel online to use 100% fuel turn times aircraft having turn rates of fully fueled.

I think oleg should put an option to force 100% fuel for all dogfight servers and you will see how below par the american ac are performing.

Most have 100 fuel turn times with 25 same goes for climb etc.

If your going to ***** do it right!

Now go start another thread about stuka manueverability which is also wrong and have 11 german fanboys all bash oleg. The fix only german aircraft threads here are getting silly all aircraft have problems which are not accurate but just talking about the ones on the side you fly for only is biasness.

Speak of them all fly all aircraft know them all, to me there is no whining but discussion on making the sim more realistic. If its not your side you always fly for everyone cries whiner etc that should stop in these forums. And let everything be discussed.

How ever i do not see any of you post data charts or any concrete evidence showing oleg is wrong or correct.

Atzebrueck
01-10-2005, 09:38 AM
Leadspitter, why don't you stop posting wrong facts in nearly every thread about LW planes (overmodeled elevator, G6 running 560 km/h at SL and so on) ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
you seem to fail to mention that the p38s online all are using 25% fuel, small maps no need for 100 fuel.

you guys keep pestering oleg to give 25 fuel performance turn times with 100% fuel test results.

Do you understand that the lightning fuel capacity was much much greater then the bf110s being effected more with full fuel load becuase of weight?

The thing i notice most about the bf110 is its very capable of dogfighting and hitting long range shots with laserbeam accuracy of shakeless recoiless 2 20mm cannon and it can be a very good turn fighter.

With payload 2 500kgs its fm seems completely killed the p38 with 2 1000lbs seems alright but still noticable decrease in performance as for rocket racks they kill the fm of the p38 me262 with the rockets also.

i think the bf110 should not be effected so much by carring 2 500kgs or the lighting with rocket trees same with the me262 with rockets which were very low drag.

But you wanting us aircraft wwhich are using 25fuel online to use 100% fuel turn times aircraft having turn rates of fully fueled.

I think oleg should put an option to force 100% fuel for all dogfight servers and you will see how below par the american ac are performing.

...

How ever i do not see any of you post data charts or any concrete evidence showing oleg is wrong or correct. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What exactly don't you understand when I'm writing the P38 having 44% higher wingloading and 17% higher powerloading while being <span class="ev_code_RED">empty</span> --> fuel doesn't matter. And if you didn't know it, the 110 is flown with 25%, too. It seems you don't really fly it very often http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.
But its achievements on dogfightservers don't matter inside of this thread, anyway.

The technical data is to be discussed, not how anybody "feels" this or that being undermodeled.

By the way, nobody was really whining about the 110's flightmodel. The thread was very civilized, until you came in.

I was discussing some facts about several planes' FM that contradict eachother.

But if your "school-physics" or reading skills are not sufficient to take part in that discussion, please stay away from the thread instead of killing it by talking about "laserbeam 20mm destroying P47 with two hits".

Try to read my initial post, at least.
There is no hostility towards 1C or Oleg (even the replies of the other participants are very calm). Did I cry "aaah they undermodeled another LW bird" or something like that ?
I didn't even begin to judge the FM of the P38 or the Beaufighter. It's just the 110 about which I'm talking here. The rest of the planes are only needed as a reference.
Still you come in and accuse me of whining.

You should be banned like Copperhead, because you are the same type of forum user.

Atzebrueck
01-10-2005, 09:46 AM
Now, back on topic:

Did anybody read the "Object Viewer" regarding the 110 ? No ?!

For the lazy ones http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif:
http://www.vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/110_1.jpg
http://www.vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/110_2.jpg
http://www.vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/110_3.jpg

And the track for showing the 30 seconds turn:
http://www.vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/110_left.trk

Hetzer_II
01-10-2005, 09:48 AM
My opinion is also that the performance of the 110 is much much below what it should be, but: Guys calm down....

Atzebrueck
01-10-2005, 10:11 AM
We are calm http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.
One has to have a very strong imagination to see this as a "whiner-thread".

Matz0r
01-10-2005, 10:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>But you wanting us aircraft wwhich are using 25fuel online to use 100% fuel turn times aircraft having turn rates of fully fueled. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

P-38J/L: 1574L x 25% = 393.5 L (104 Gal.)
Bf110G2: 1268L x 25% = 317 L (84 Gal.)

So, in reality a P38 carrying 25% fuel carries more fuel weight than a Bf110 with 25% fuel.

p1ngu666
01-10-2005, 12:08 PM
u guys need to find test data of the real aircraft, there are lw guys with the info (for 109/190) atleast so hopefully they have some on 110, alas i dont http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Nubarus
01-10-2005, 01:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jugent:
Face the facts german planes are not Maddox favourites. Does it surprise you? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, German planes are his favorates, especially the Bf109 rates high on Oleg's chart.

I guess you missed that fact when you drew your conclusion. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

WWMaxGunz
01-10-2005, 03:39 PM
Atze is only pointing out things which do seem clear. Even with fuel differences, it
really does look like right now the 110 FM is not right. And I don't see him saying
"make it this" or anything, just calling attention. There is also the dive max speeds....

One question about the turns is, are those at the best turn speeds for those planes?
Also do the 110 props counter-rotate or is it supposed to turn better in one direction?
The P-38, they had a way of turning fast using some vertical and differential power...
is the P-38 time you give using that and can the 110 also do the same, or should it be
able to? Not saying in any way the comparison is wrong but when turn times alone comes
up without conditions and then involving twin engine planes, my mind sees many variables
that could be introduced. I'm still not really sure of the people saying cloverleaf in
a P-38 should out-turn 109's down low and slow, but then slow in a 109 isn't a good idea.

It would be best to get good charts per plane and run Robbans-style tests and look at
the compare utility which, is that close anymore?

I have this feeling that not all planes get worked on every patch, maybe every other
just due to time -- or we get 6 months between and 1 or 2 patches if lucky.

VVS-Manuc
01-11-2005, 04:20 PM
*-* Bümp *-*

JG52Schatten
01-18-2005, 01:52 PM
+=Bump=+

Willey
01-18-2005, 03:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nubarus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jugent:
Face the facts german planes are not Maddox favourites. Does it surprise you? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, German planes are his favorates, especially the Bf109 rates high on Oleg's chart.

I guess you missed that fact when you drew your conclusion. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Replace Oleg with Ubi and then you have it. Basta. BTW: IBTL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif