PDA

View Full Version : I don't get it: SpitMk5 superior to Fw190A4/5



tigertalon
01-04-2005, 03:45 AM
Hello

Well, it may be just for me, but AFAIK historically A series (2,3,4) really outclassed Mk5. When flying it, I simply cannot fight against Mk5 (if I do not have huge alt advantage)... (It may well just be me, but normally I have no big problems engaging and downing La7s with 109G2 - online of course). Spit always wins.

Fw climbs worse, about equal speed, has no diving advantage (it should have AFAIK), and let us also leave Mg151 vs Hispano out of debate. It also seems it's engine has 800 instead of 1800 HP :/. So please comment on what is wrong (if there is something wrong in your oppinion) in game about this topic? I know it can also just be my flying, but not only in my hands, but generaly Fw looses against Spit Mk5...

thnx

tigertalon
01-04-2005, 03:45 AM
Hello

Well, it may be just for me, but AFAIK historically A series (2,3,4) really outclassed Mk5. When flying it, I simply cannot fight against Mk5 (if I do not have huge alt advantage)... (It may well just be me, but normally I have no big problems engaging and downing La7s with 109G2 - online of course). Spit always wins.

Fw climbs worse, about equal speed, has no diving advantage (it should have AFAIK), and let us also leave Mg151 vs Hispano out of debate. It also seems it's engine has 800 instead of 1800 HP :/. So please comment on what is wrong (if there is something wrong in your oppinion) in game about this topic? I know it can also just be my flying, but not only in my hands, but generaly Fw looses against Spit Mk5...

thnx

WOLFMondo
01-04-2005, 04:09 AM
Don't ever climb vs a Spit, there interceptors and climbing is what there built for. You should be able to roll and dive to get out there way, if nothing else use that huge roll advantage to shake them off and that straight line speed, the A5 is very quick on the deck. Are you using the manual prop pitch? That gives a nice performance gain also.

clint-ruin
01-04-2005, 04:18 AM
Stay above 450kmh and stay above 5km if you can possibly help it. This is where the A4 has the most advantage over the Vb - outruns and outclimbs it if you stay in your safe zone of speed and alt. Don't engage the spit where it has the advantage, at all, ever - it can turn the tables on you very very quickly if you allow it the opportunity to pull back into a slow speed climb or a slow turn. Keeping your speed up also maximises your roll rate advantage over the spit. You get superior performance, but not -that- much superior that you can get silly in a fight and push the 190 into hard slow speed turns or climbs. That's just not what it's for.

The entire spitfire lines engine is extremely weak to APs as well - just one drawn APIT round is enough to make it catch fire almost immediately. Shoot him in the face.

sapre
01-04-2005, 04:29 AM
In the in game model viewer it says something "FW190 was supperior to Spitmk5 to every aspect and RAF sufferd heavy rosses" but it doesn't seem so in game.
Spitmk5 seems much better plane.

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 04:30 AM
Spit 5 has no big chance against anton 4 and 5 in this game. Excluding of course the ultra discrepancy between MG151 and hispanos.

Your plane is faster.. by a lot. So use it. Also maneuver at faster speeds.

If you keep at 400 kph.. you climb BETTER than Spit at same speed. So that way you will outpace him.

Just use the manual pitch when climbing.. return to auto at level and dive since you won't get much extra performance in this sector of flight... and will overheat fast.

also FW's have a nasty spin on roll axis when at very low speeds and creating AoA. So reduce your power in this condition, that will diminish spin a lot.


But more important.. NEVER engage a Spitfire in a 1vs 1 fight. you are nothing at constant turn fighting. You are better at a fight of 2 FW vs 4 spits than in a 1 vs 1.

Also if you prefer to keep close you can leave your outer cannons and MG at home and use the 2 cannon only layout. You will loose speed due to rrack (about 10 kph) but will gain climb, acceleration at lower speed, E retain and less prone to stalls. This option is only advisable at A4.. A5 have enough extra HP to compensate for extra weight.

clint-ruin
01-04-2005, 04:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sapre:
In the in game model viewer it says something "FW190 was supperior to Spitmk5 to every aspect and RAF sufferd heavy rosses" but it doesn't seem so in game.
Spitmk5 seems much better plane. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK the engines in the Vbs we have are a later mark than the ones first fitted to the type [Icefire or Buzz would know for sure]. It also helps if you replicate the high speed tag-team slashing style attacks the Spits fell victim to when they decided to mix it up on the wrong side of the channel. And get out of the weeds if you can possibly help it at all.

clint-ruin
01-04-2005, 04:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
Spit 5 has no big chance against anton 4 and 5 in this game. Excluding of course the ultra discrepancy between MG151 and hispanos.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This actually ends up being less of a problem for the A4 and A5 than it is on something like the 109 series where you only have one cannon, or even the A6/A8. The MGFF spit out 1/4 AP, the MG151/20 spit out 1/5AP. Firing both off together gives you a decent chance at ruining the engine of the spit if even a single AP connects, from memory you need around 2-3 HE shells to have the same effect on the engine of most inline engine planes.

F19_Ob
01-04-2005, 05:29 AM
Hello mate.
I'm not at all sure I can give a complete explanation but may be a few things to contemplate on.
The fw190 is indeed tougher and I think have better performance in the game, but not an overwhelming advantage against even the spit5.

The spit mkV has a small cannonload and soon leaves it with peashooters only (compared to later spits).
The spit also loose the performance in climb fast in turning and combined maneuvering.
The spit is still a dangerous opponent and a good hit even from 6-800m can do serious damage
although it requires luck and/or a marksman.
Its quite possible to turn with a spit for a while but since a fw cant turn fully with a spit it must keep the energy to ensure enough separation. Even If u manage to keep this separation Its fully possible for an experienced
spit5 driver to hang on his prop in his climb after u to get as many shots at u or your direction as possible in your climb where u are at your slowest.
Thats why U have also keep out of angle from the spits bullets and that may be very difficult in some circumstances , and I personally use the rollrate and try to squeeze the maximum of the climb, and I never climb straight more than a few moments and always try to increase the "off" angle to make a followers aim as hard as possible.
But even this wont help on every occasion against an expert in the spit.

A good way to practice and understand this "off" angle is to record tracks and that way u can always determine if u succeded or failed depending on your own actions.
Try also to calculate how much depended on your opponents skill level. Was he a rookie, average or expert? Have u given the opponent enough credit for his skill? I wasnt able to do that before I learned to examine my tracks in detail.
Also count in who had the advantage in speed, altitude or angle.
Many times U can have the altitude and speed but the enemy below u manage to point his guns at U first.
So there are a big number of situations where
an advantage can turn to the opposit depending on slight miscalculation and even just bad luck and even experienced can fail.
One difference between inexperienced and experienced is that the latter can recover from their mistakes and also know and recognize situations and can think ahead and act on them more effectively. This increases survivability alot.
Experience do not guarantee survival and the plane u fly has lots to do with it.
A Fw190 can be untouchable for many planes with worse performance and even the fw190 outurns a hurricane in high speeds because it can declerate faster and have more responsive elevators, and just fly away from it if ended up slow, but if a hurricane 2c manage to point its four cannons against an enemy it can win although it never can leave or chase the fw190 nor 109 at will.

I do not all know your skill level and do not know if u have examined the battles as described above, but I have done that for many years now and I must say that this have given me great insight and experience and still do.
This have enabled me to survive against fw190 and 109 in crappy planes like the heavy double seat il-2 and even score multiple kills against these on frequent basis although I have been shot down even more frequently in this babe.

So ... dont get worked up about getting shot down by a spit now and then, since even a hurri or il-2 may be able to do it.
Some days U just have bad luck or are'nt enough concentrated.

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

robban75
01-04-2005, 06:15 AM
Has anyone ever managed to reach these speeds in the Fw 190A-4 in-game? http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A4speed.jpg

F19_Ob
01-04-2005, 07:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by robban75:
Has anyone ever managed to reach these speeds in the Fw 190A-4 in-game? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have'nt tested that...but
Have u tried to reach peak performance specs in the other planes in the game, on all sides?

Remember that optimal factorycondition specs is very different from actual combat performance during combat conditions in the field.
The optimums were never reached on any side and it was normal to draw from the calculation of performance by default.
Many pilots have commented about this when asked to explain specs about their planes in interviews.


Regarding the quote u included.
If one for example looks at russian aces or other aces accounts and feelings they may have similar experiences about their opponents.
How many of those opponents were rookies or aces? How many of the planes were battleworn.
Had it an new or worn engine?
This is only a few questions but it illustrates variables(components) wich are very difficult to calculate but absolutely nescessary if one wants to determine an absolute performance relation between different planes.
One also must have complete understanding how the battle went and who was on the disadvantage and how it developed.

How good a plane was has often been described by how many kills as a whole it achieved.
So a shot down passanger or cargo plane or bomber or inferior fighter was also counted, but that ofcourse dont say anything about the performance.

An example;
Late in the europe war the allied planes outnumbered the axis and it had been the other way around earlier.
How many of the kills in this situation happened because one side was outnumbered? how many of these planes were taking off or landing?
Based on such statistics planes got reputation.
But if one looks on pilots own descriptions on all sides it becomes complicated because its so many different experiences and stories even from the same side.


Forgive me Robban .... its not ment as critisism, just illustration of complication. I just enjoy to complicate subjects....kind of a hobby really. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fish6891
01-04-2005, 07:38 AM
You can kick butt in Early War servers if you fly the A4 correctly

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 07:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by robban75:
Has anyone ever managed to reach these speeds in the Fw 190A-4 in-game? http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/A4speed.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeap.. You can reach very close to red line speed if you have 1/2 or less fuel and use manual pitch, closed rads,60 taps down trimm. But the engine will be ruined.. You dont even need to get the overheat message (you must run in that power setting for more than the 1 min limit of 2700rpm). When you thortle back you will hava a damaged engine that will not reach 2400 rpm anymore.

But you can reach quite safely 550 kph without permanent damage to engine. Also using manual prop.



I would say the early FW would be PERFECT if they could remove cannons and not receive the bomb rack..

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 07:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
Spit 5 has no big chance against anton 4 and 5 in this game. Excluding of course the ultra discrepancy between MG151 and hispanos.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This actually ends up being less of a problem for the A4 and A5 than it is on something like the 109 series where you only have one cannon, or even the A6/A8. The MGFF spit out 1/4 AP, the MG151/20 spit out 1/5AP. Firing both off together gives you a decent chance at ruining the engine of the spit if even a single AP connects, from memory you need around 2-3 HE shells to have the same effect on the engine of most inline engine planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I usually do no load the MG FF with me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif They have a much weird arc of fire and not enough ammo to justify all the weight. The bomb rack increases drag at high speed.. but the smaller weight usually compensates in climb.. but of course.. it would be more CORRECT and better if I could fly without outer guns and without bomb rack.

Tvrdi
01-04-2005, 08:31 AM
bomb rack is one the bigger jokes in the game (like gunsight dropping was)....but every good cake has a little **** in the middle it seams hehe

jurinko
01-04-2005, 08:43 AM
when the 190 landed in Pembrey in June 1942, the preludium was like that:

Fws were pursuing RAF planes over the Channel and then just one Fw was reported, so 4 MkVBs took off to intercept it. Two crashed during take-off, one returned due to engine problems and the remaining one was quickly dispatched by Fw. Then Faber laned at RAF base etc.

Did you notice that Fw, as generally superb plane, quickly dispatched inferior MkVB? Here, without massive advantage in alt, speed, numbers or surprise, Fw can not start fight except one head-on.

If you fly it in a manner that even Hartmann shot dow 1-3 planes per whole day, you can do very good in it. If enemies are slower than you, lone wolf tactics is still acceptable, but if adversaries are as fast as you, you need some Fws around you and TS is recommended.

Jaws2002
01-04-2005, 08:56 AM
Spitfire MK V is turkey vs FW190-A4 or A5.
Be sure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Jaws2002
01-04-2005, 09:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
I usually do no load the MG FF with me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif They have a much weird arc of fire and not enough ammo to justify all the weight. The bomb rack increases drag at high speed.. but the smaller weight usually compensates in climb.. but of course.. it would be more CORRECT and better if I could fly without outer guns and without bomb rack. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The MG/FF is the best weapon the A4/A5 has. If you hit with the FF you can be sure you did damage, unlike the MG151/20.

faustnik
01-04-2005, 10:15 AM
***Just my opinion after looking at the subject for a while.***

I don't think we have a channel front Fw190A4 in the sim. The A4 we have behaves much more like a early F2 or other Jabo modified version used on the Ostfront. Spitfire fans try to refute the RAF's Farnborough tests of the A3 and explain away the dominance of the Fw190 over the Channel in '42 as a "tactical advantage" situation. All attempts to revise history and make their favorite plane look better. The Fw190 probably had a climb advantage over the Vb throughout a greater speed range than in PF. The 190 was more maneuverable than the version we have, and faster as well. Read the works af RAF Captain Eric Brown for a detailed description of the Fw190s dogfighting abiilities.

Numbers from factory tests done in different countries under different conditions would not be as relavent as side-by-side comparison with two planes. With the 190, we have the RAF's tests of serveral 190s and the USN tests of the A5. All of those tests revealed the 190 as having strong climb ability down to 280kph. The historical roll rate of the 190 was far superior to its adversaries, much more so than in PF. And then there is the Mg151 issue...

Even with all those questions of performance the Fw190A4 can dominate the Spit Vb in PF. Oleg himself clearly outlined the method of using high speed to climb away from the SpitVb. When flying the 190, you have to concern yourself more with remaining safe and less with engaging the enemy. Only engage when in a favorable position.

p1ngu666
01-04-2005, 10:37 AM
well the spit vb we have ingame is slower than raf ones, by 40 kph at sl, and 20kph at high alt.

a4 is the derated version? robban u might have a upgraded a4 from later or something i dunno, or it could be too slow :\


vb (no lf) is perhaps better at high alt, never a 190 area (mid/low) vs LF vb's take the fight up high, they lose speed past 3k...

to use roll advantage, roll right, watch spit roll to follow u, then slam it back to the left and do a break turn, (thats how they did it irl, more or less). oh and u need todo that at high speed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

faustnik
01-04-2005, 10:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
well the spit vb we have ingame is slower than raf ones, by 40 kph at sl, and 20kph at high alt.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I agree, both the Spit Vb and the Fw190A4 are too slow.

robban75
01-04-2005, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Ob:

Have u tried to reach peak performance specs in the other planes in the game, on all sides? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not all, but most of the commonly used. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I don't have real data for planes I'm afraid.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Forgive me Robban .... its not ment as critisism, just illustration of complication. I just enjoy to complicate subjects....kind of a hobby really. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No need to forgive,, I enjoyed reading what you wrote, and you are right of course. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

robban75
01-04-2005, 11:11 AM
Some sealevel topspeeds. Crimea map, 100% fuel. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

P-47D-27

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/P-47SLspeed.jpg

P-51D-20NA

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/MustangSLspeed.jpg

LaGG-3(66)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/LaGG-366SLspeed.jpg

La-5FN

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/La-5FNSLspeed.jpg

La-7

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/La-7SLspeed.jpg

Bf 109K-4

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/K4SLspeed.jpg

Spitfire MkIxc

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/IXcSLspeed.jpg

I-185 (M-82)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/I-185M-82SLspeed.jpg

I-185 (M-71)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/I-185M-71SLspeed.jpg

F4U-1

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/F4U-1SLspeed.jpg

Fw 190D-9 (1945)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/D-9SLspeed.jpg

Fw 190A-4 manual 100% pitch

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/A-4SLspeed.jpg

Fw 190A-4 Auto pitch

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/A-4SLspeed2.jpg

Yak-9U

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/Yak9USLspeed.jpg

faustnik
01-04-2005, 11:25 AM
Robban,

I'd love to see a P-51D and Dora SL speed comparison at 25% fuel. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


(poor Robban, every time he posts a test we ask for more) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

robban75
01-04-2005, 11:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Robban,

I'd love to see a P-51D and Dora SL speed comparison at 25% fuel. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


(poor Robban, every time he posts a test we ask for more) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He he, not to worry, I enjoy doing these tests! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Anyways, there's no dramatic change in speeds at 25% fuel.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/MustangSLspeed25fuel.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/D-9SLspeed25fuel.jpg

faustnik
01-04-2005, 11:54 AM
Thanks Robban! So, we still have a 5mph safety advantage in the Dora! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Do the '44 and '45 Dora still have similar SL speeds?

The Fw190A9s seem to be fairly close to the Dora/P-51 at SL too.

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 11:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Don't ever climb vs a Spit, there interceptors and climbing is what there built for. You should be able to roll and dive to get out there way, if nothing else use that huge roll advantage to shake them off and that straight line speed, the A5 is very quick on the deck. Are you using the manual prop pitch? That gives a nice performance gain also. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah WOLF is right. Fw190 rolls like my grandma was rolling on dancing floor some 45-50 years ago. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Unlike Fw190, Spit has a poor roll rate, and that is IMO the biggest Fw190 advantage over Spit.

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 12:02 PM
robban75, one of these names above pic is heavily highlighted: I-185 (M-71)

Incredible...

MEGILE
01-04-2005, 12:02 PM
How about the D9 with manual pitch? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

faustnik
01-04-2005, 12:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
How about the D9 with manual pitch? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That one is hard to read through the engine fire. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 12:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
How about the D9 with manual pitch? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That one is hard to read through the engine fire. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ROTFLMAO
http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/stupid.gif http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/cwm/cwm/piss2.gif
http://www.forum.hr/images/smilies/lol.gif

robban75
01-04-2005, 12:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Thanks Robban! So, we still have a 5mph safety advantage in the Dora! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Do the '44 and '45 Dora still have similar SL speeds?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The D-9 '44 is about 7-8km/h slower at SL than the '45 D-9, when it should be 9km/h faster.

FatBoyHK
01-04-2005, 12:47 PM
There are two prespectives on this issue:

1. On the offense, stay fast and high, BnZ 'em till their death, or you lose your E advantage, whatever come first. On defense, your roll rate, speed, and high speed handling will be your friend.... It is really as simple as that, every one can tell you all these "advices"... Indeed, they are all very true. Those were in the history book, those were how 190 dominated over spit5 IRL.

2. In this game, while all of the above are true to a certain extent, the other side of the equation is not quite. Spit isn't the one to be blamed, however, it is the overall FM. Planes don't lose enough energy in high-g turns. This apply to all planes but benefit TnBer more, just because they (Spit5) turns more than you (FW190A4/5) do. In a Co-Alt Co-E head-on merge, even the 190 extent striaght ahead, the spit still has a decent chance of catching up, especially if the initial speed (for both planes) is low. IRL it is not quite possible.... To get over with it you need to fly even faster and need to consider disengaging in more circumstances.... Not really a show-stopper, just keep it in mind, and you will be ok, you can still dominate a spit5 on a 190A4/5.

robban75
01-04-2005, 01:10 PM
Here are some more. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Yak-3

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/Yak3SLspeed.jpg

Spitfire MkVb

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/VbSLspeed.jpg

Spitfire LF MkV

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/VbLFSLspeed.jpg

Bf 109G-6/AS

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/G-6ASSLspeed.jpg

Bf 109G-10

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/G-10SLspeed.jpg

Bf 109G-14

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/G-14SLspeed.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
01-04-2005, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Ob:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by robban75:
Has anyone ever managed to reach these speeds in the Fw 190A-4 in-game? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have'nt tested that...but
Have u tried to reach peak performance specs in the other planes in the game, on all sides?

Remember that optimal factorycondition specs is very different from actual combat performance during combat conditions in the field.
The optimums were never reached on any side and it was normal to draw from the calculation of performance by default. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Robban didnt show the "optimum" data for the FW-190-A4

what he showed was the speeds the FW-190 can be flowen at by AI

its supposedly what we are supposed to be abel to achieve in game ourselves

up untill recently , the entire FW series were the only planes in FB with under-moddeled climb-ability

think about that , every single plane in FB used to climb too well (many still do) unless you took a FW-190 which didnt even climb as well as it should have

& as it stands at the moment , the 41 MkVb has a well over-boosted climb time . . . . . & one thing that FB has showen me is that with climb power you can turn the tables on a turn advantage . . . ..


. . . but if the bandit turns better as well . . . . .

( http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif @ the G6/AS ! man im going to have to give that thing a spin pronto !)

NorrisMcWhirter
01-04-2005, 02:32 PM
Hi,

A brief look at the Faber test provides the conclusion that the A3 was superior to the Spit Vb in all respects except sustained turning.

Of course, it doesn't say whether it was necessary to keep your speed up to remain superior so I suppose we will never know.

One thing that is of note is the poor cannon performance of the 190s when the 151/20 should be very nearly as destructive as the Hispano. It's not.

Cheers,
norris

LeadSpitter_
01-04-2005, 04:31 PM
do you have tracks of these screenshots dont prove a thing, little nose down 20-30 extra kmph.

tracks of each aircraft would be great robban becuase i certainly cannot achieve those speeds for the p47 and mustang perfect level flight and im able to achiever higher speed in the spit then you have and lagg3 SL.

maybe they are from an old version but 3.02bm 3.03 540 is max speed for the mustang p47 and p38j l

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 04:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Atomic_Marten:
Also, it is quite weird that with every newer type of Bf109, speed drops. I thought it would be other way around.
1.Bf109G6AS --588
2.Bf109G10 --584
3.Bf109G14 --579

kph.http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/think.gif http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/stupid.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]faustnik:
Hmmm...I do know that the Bf109G10 came after the G14, not sure where the G6AS fits in though? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes.. G10 is the fastest Gustav there is according to many sources.(inspired by your post, I was doing some search online about issue).

Geez, I'm such n00b. http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/wallbash.gif
http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/oops.gif

I have immediatelly ordered the "Messerschmitt Bf109 F-K", by Willy Radinger
, published by Schiffer books, just to clear some stuff..

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 04:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>FatBoyHK:
...

2. In this game, while all of the above are true to a certain extent, the other side of the equation is not quite. Spit isn't the one to be blamed, however, it is the overall FM. Planes don't lose enough energy in high-g turns. This apply to all planes but benefit TnBer more, just because they (Spit5) turns more than you (FW190A4/5) do. In a Co-Alt Co-E head-on merge, even the 190 extent striaght ahead, the spit still has a decent chance of catching up, especially if the initial speed (for both planes) is low. IRL it is not quite possible.... To get over with it you need to fly even faster and need to consider disengaging in more circumstances.... Not really a show-stopper, just keep it in mind, and you will be ok, you can still dominate a spit5 on a 190A4/5. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. About sharp turns and speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
01-04-2005, 05:03 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

trim and radiator closed lead http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

robban, try 0% pitch on dora...

G late arent in number/date order, think its in the ingame data, there all modified g6's basicaly

faustnik
01-04-2005, 05:14 PM
Hmmm...I do know that the Bf109G10 came after the G14, not sure where the G6AS fits in though?

clint-ruin
01-04-2005, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
_***Just my opinion after looking at the subject for a while.***_

I don't think we have a channel front Fw190A4 in the sim. The A4 we have behaves much more like a early F2 or other Jabo modified version used on the Ostfront. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's interesting you mention that. I always thought our A4 and A5 were using boost settings the real things weren't cleared for in reality, or possibly just not in the east. Do you remember reading anything like that? Threads on this were back a long ways..

LeadSpitter_
01-04-2005, 05:30 PM
pingu show a track of those speeds wiseguy/girl with p51 p47.

Also the problem with the 109 vs spit is all the 109 jocks were use to out turning the spit low speed low alt which they cant do anymore for the first time in the sim. thats where all the complaints are coming from. 109s still have a huge dive breakup speed over the spit and are much more agile in roll and elevator response high speed 700-900kmph. So flying the 109s more like 190s is the thing to do rather then a low alt turn fight. all planes do equally well like that but the 109s and 190s have a huge advantage being able to run away anytime they want.

btw when will emils get fixed

faustnik
01-04-2005, 05:32 PM
Clint,

The Fw190 data that is available does not paint a very clear picture. It's hard to say what boost pressure was run and where and which 190s had NE boost. I have read in several places that derrated or even Fw190A4s with old DB801Cs were used on the Eastern Front. Oleg lists the A4 as using 1.42 atas boost in the object viewer for what that is worth. The Fw190A5 tested at 570kph sealevel at 1.42, why would the lighter Fw190A4 be slower at the same power? The use of NE boost on the A5 increased it to 1.65 atas. I'm not sure how many of the A5s had the NE system though.

Certainly there were a lot of F1's and F2's used on the Eastern front. I doubt the Soviets would have known which version they were testing.

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 05:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
do you have tracks of these screenshots dont prove a thing, little nose down 20-30 extra kmph.

tracks of each aircraft would be great robban becuase i certainly cannot achieve those speeds for the p47 and mustang perfect level flight and im able to achiever higher speed in the spit then you have and lagg3 SL.

maybe they are from an old version but 3.02bm 3.03 540 is max speed for the mustang p47 and p38j l <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


just try again leadspitter... www.inf.ufsc.br/~stein/tracks/p38jat580.TRK (http://www.inf.ufsc.br/~stein/tracks/p38jat580.TRK)

didnÔ┬┤t even waited to see how fast it could reach.. but is at LEAST 40 kph fastre than you state it is.

I will on time post more tracks (but it is already a.m. here)

VW-IceFire
01-04-2005, 05:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Clint,

The Fw190 data that is available does not paint a very clear picture. It's hard to say what boost pressure was run and where and which 190s had NE boost. I have read in several places that derrated or even Fw190A4s with old DB801Cs were used on the Eastern Front. Oleg lists the A4 as using 1.42 atas boost in the object viewer for what that is worth. The Fw190A5 tested at 570kph sealevel at 1.42, why would the lighter Fw190A4 be slower at the same power? The use of NE boost on the A5 increased it to 1.65 atas. I'm not sure how many of the A5s had the NE system though.

Certainly there were a lot of F1's and F2's used on the Eastern front. I doubt the Soviets would have known which version they were testing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thats a good point about the Eastern Front FW190's. I've recently learned that they were employed mostly as high speed bombers with the 109s flying escort. Except 109 pilots were sometimes miffed when, after dropping their bombs, the FW190s they were supposed to escort up and pulled away from them.

A few nights ago I flew with a group of two other fellows on UK-Dedicated in a 1942 scenario in Crimea. Bf-109G-2s FW190A-4s against things like the La-5 (1942), Lagg-3, and Mig-3. Although shot down a few times there was a point where the three of us were perfectly positioned. Altitude was 2000 meters, generally above some of the opposition (many were escorting IL2s) and the rare bandit above us. At some points, we totally dominated the situation...regardless of opponent. The three of us would select a target, drop in at 600 kph, shoot, disengage, regain 2000 meters, and watch as the next guy went down to hit the target. The La-5 (early) is easily just as dangerous as the Mark V and yet the La-5 guys were scratching their heads while we maintained total control of the situation. There was not once a chance for them to return fire during this period. We did get overwhelemed and return to base but we collectively scored 6-7 planes destroyed including 2 IL2s and a number of fighters. All of us were experienced FW190 pilots. Zoom climb has definately been improved in recent patches and energy retention with the A-4 and A-5 are excellent. These planes are dangerous, even at low altitudes without advantage (provided that you operate in a team). This isn't a good plane for lone wolfing it up in a swirling dogfight server...but when the game becomes more objectives oriented...then the FW shines as a capable fighter.

Atomic_Marten
01-04-2005, 05:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
Also the problem with the 109 vs spit is all the 109 jocks were use to out turning the spit low speed low alt which they cant do anymore for the first time in the sim. thats where all the complaints are coming from. 109s still have a huge dive breakup speed over the spit and are much more agile in roll and elevator response high speed 700-900kmph. So flying the 109s more like 190s is the thing to do rather then a low alt turn fight. all planes do equally well like that but the 109s and 190s have a huge advantage being able to run away anytime they want.

btw when will emils get fixed <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He he.. when in Bf109 it never crossed my mind to get in the turn fight with Spitfire. That is the one way ticket http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. But I'm not surprised when I see that someone online actually trying to outturn Spit in Bf109 (I assume that must be G2 model, even G6AS is agile enough, but.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

LeadSpitter_
01-04-2005, 05:54 PM
thanks for the track but your using the exploit dipping nose down climb dipping nose down etc.

Its a problem in this game where you gain more speed then you loose. In rl doing that would bleed of your airspeed.

try it staying trimmed perfectly to 30m for example and you will get 540 doing the dip nose down you will get 560 but that is not perfect level flight speed.

you can do the same thing the the 190d to get above 10,000m dip nose down climb with the speed before it drops do the same and you gain so much momentum seems to be one of the other probs of the game engine and E bleed of fms.

thanks for the track once again and btw how is 560kmh 40 faster then what i have said 540kmh i get but in level flight not using the dip nose down to gain speed thing which is not sustained altitude SL speed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

i guess your tired so i can see why you made the mistake but its 560 not 580 in your track


See http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v97/acespace/560.jpg

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
thanks for the track but your using the exploit dipping nose down climb dipping nose down etc.

Its a problem in this game where you gain more speed then you loose. In rl doing that would bleed of your airspeed.

try it staying trimmed perfectly to 30m for example and you will get 540 doing the dip nose down you will get 560 but that is not perfect level flight speed.

you can do the same thing the the 190d to get above 10,000m dip nose down climb with the speed before it drops do the same and you gain so much momentum seems to be one of the other probs of the game engine and E bleed of fms.

thanks for the track once again and btw how is 560kmh 40 faster then what i have said 540kmh i get but in level flight not using the dip nose down to gain speed thing which is not sustained altitude SL speed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

just ridiculous. I got no more than 5 kph in ANY dive after I passed 500 kph (that dive before 500 is not important.. since both agree the plane can pass 500). And a single kph I gained while CLIMBING a single pair of meters.. while above 540 kph invalidates your statement. If you use a little bit of physics you know that.

If you just donÔ┬┤t wanna accept it.. just your problem. Its quite hard for me to keep a plane more stable than that due to my joystick.

lets bet? I will make a track begginning at 5 meters and never going over 8 meters.. If I reach more than 540 on a p38j you pay me a PF copy.. ok for you?

LeadSpitter_
01-04-2005, 06:08 PM
ask anyone in here who flies the game alot oldman they all know of it, ask robban75 or jv44s lots know what im talking about and view the track again to see it.

also look at the screenshot its 560 not 580, enough bickering do it holding one alt without nose dip down speed up climb 10m dive down 10m etc.

stay at 30m exactly and you will get 540 like i said.

if your having a problem with your joystick just map the arrow keys to trim to hold an exact altitude and dont touch the joystick.

OldMan____
01-04-2005, 06:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
ask anyone in here who flies the game alot oldman they all know of it, ask robban75 or jv44s lots know what im talking about and view the track again to see it.

also look at the screenshot its 560 not 580, enough bickering do it holding one alt without nose dip down speed up climb 10m dive down 10m etc.

stay at 30m exactly and you will get 540 like i said.

if your having a problem with your joystick just map the arrow keys to trim to hold an exact altitude and dont touch the joystick. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you talking about IAS or TAS ? I tested exactly as you said..(in fact intercepted input device signals and forced a filtering .. game devel toys rox) and could reach (without dropping a single meter between 520 and point where quitted test) 562 kph TAS.

And if dropping One or 2 meters is required in the engine by ALL planes to surpass certain speeds(as it is) it is no problem.. since it is a extremely ridiculous imperfection, that I would bet that is due to numerical stability in simmulations. When I wrote my physics simmulation engine I made something simmilar.. and everyone does the same. When a resultant force is smaller than a given Epsilon value. It is negated, that is required to keep numeric stability on simmulation. That is why while completely level flight your very very very little extra power cannot increase speed. But the can for sure keep it much fastre .. as long as you overlaps that barrier (wiuth a small dive for example)

Tha is something that Oleg cannot avoid in a discreete simmulation. If this kind os satabilization issue is not applied.. simmualtion will diverge from correct results each moment faster and faster...

Since NO ONE flies like that during combat.. no problem here.


So.. do not use a numerical simmulation problem as a FM is not correctly modelled argument. All planes suffer from the same. And any normal flying do not suffer from it.

WUAF_Badsight
01-04-2005, 07:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
109s still have a huge dive breakup speed over the spit and are much more agile in roll and elevator response high speed 700-900kmph.

btw when will emils get fixed <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whats do you think's wrong with the Emils Leadspitter ?

do you really find the Bf109 to have better elevator authority than Spitfires over 700 Kmh ?

WUAF_Badsight
01-04-2005, 07:23 PM
J model

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/P-38JSLspeed.jpg

LeadSpitter_
01-04-2005, 09:11 PM
absolutely the 109f g k in elevator authority high speed along with roll rate badsight. The use to have much better low speed better then the spitfire hurricane p40c b e m which they do not anymore but it is still very close.

And for the emil enough said vs hurricane in climb speed, sl speed and manueverabilty along with high alt as well and E bleed.

Im sure the luft crowd can and will point out vs all hurrican charts

these speeds are IAS indicated airspeeds.

clint-ruin
01-04-2005, 09:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Clint,

The Fw190 data that is available does not paint a very clear picture. It's hard to say what boost pressure was run and where and which 190s had NE boost. I have read in several places that derrated or even Fw190A4s with old DB801Cs were used on the Eastern Front. Oleg lists the A4 as using 1.42 atas boost in the object viewer for what that is worth. The Fw190A5 tested at 570kph sealevel at 1.42, why would the lighter Fw190A4 be slower at the same power? The use of NE boost on the A5 increased it to 1.65 atas. I'm not sure how many of the A5s had the NE system though. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, my recollection of the whole thing is fuzzy - it was brought out in one of those 20 something page slugmatches between Isegrim and Huckles and Skychimp and people I think.

As for differences in speed between the same boost rating for the A4 and A5, I'd be looking at things like drag, redesigned engine cowling and radiator stuff for a start, prop or prop gearing changes, anything like that. Same as for the A8 vs A9 matchup in game which comes out a bit wonky due to the prop Olegs got stuck on the A9.

From what I understand we're sort of engaging in a bit of masturbation over absolute speed values like this - I am pretty sure two examples of the same type of serial produced plane in real life could and did show more differences than we get between some of the whole different models in the game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Certainly there were a lot of F1's and F2's used on the Eastern front. I doubt the Soviets would have known which version they were testing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The soviets certainly weren't as impressed with the FW as the Brits were, that we know for sure. Different mission roles and engagment parameters count for a bit I'm sure - the reverse of the Spit vs FW matchups over the channel when you think of it. Ground attack missions meant that they had to operate where the LaGGs and Yaks were happiest fighting too, down in the weeds.

As far as I know Oleg has stated multiple times that the FWs are modelled from german serial production data and not soviet data though.

Jaws2002
01-04-2005, 09:54 PM
Why do you guys think the Fw 190's A/F have the worst acceleration in the game?

faustnik
01-04-2005, 09:54 PM
I agree with what you are saying about speeds Clint. Historical test results sure have a lot of variation!

We know a couple things about the PF Fw190s:

- they are really fast
- they are tough
- they can change direction very quickly
- they have a lot of guns

All of those facts make them excellent fighters in the sim. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WUAF_Badsight
01-04-2005, 10:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
And for the emil enough said vs hurricane in climb speed, sl speed and manueverabilty along with high alt as well and E bleed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
well about the Spitfire at high , high speed , theres nothing that the Bf109 can do that the Spitfire cant do far better

& now the Spitfire is turning better than it at slow speed too , so its all fixed then

& i agree that the Emil feels too slow & heavy , it was a close match for the most manouverable Spitfire of all , the Mk1

@ Clint Ruin , the A5 was exactly the same as the A4 except for a boost system , right ?

the A3 RAF test was at a higher boost than the LW were running at that time , so it would have been a closer thing than that test supposed the difference between the 190 & the Spitfire at that time was

BTW , are you still unable to get over 540 Kmh SL in the P-38 ? because if your really carefull , she will wind up too 560 on the speedbar

OldMan____
01-05-2005, 01:56 AM
No its noot a boos issue. A5 had a longer nose (10 cm I think) that reduces drag, same way Dora long thin nose reduced drag by a lot, but at a minor level. Also its engine was able to run at 2700 rpm for MUCH longer than A4 engine due to this extra space it had. Just don't know if that is enough to explain all speed difference. For sure A4 should be slower, but how much? Weight matters much less than aerodynamics at this condition.


About speed test. Well, than all understood LeadSpitter.. I was talking about TAS speed, since in Crimeia they are quite different at sea level.

F19_Ob
01-05-2005, 05:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:

Also the problem with the 109 vs spit is all the 109 jocks were use to out turning the spit low speed low alt which they cant do anymore for the first time in the sim.thats where all the complaints are coming from.


109s still have a huge dive breakup speed over the spit and are much more agile in roll and elevator response high speed 700-900kmph. So flying the 109s more like 190s is the thing to do rather then a low alt turn fight. all planes do equally well like that but the 109s and 190s have a huge advantage being able to run away anytime they want.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree with u fully on this...

There is one thing though in turning...for example in a 109 G2.

Its still very possible to do hard breaking turns (and should be) when from an energy advantage and turn with or inside pretty much anything and the good stall characteristics makes it still ok in slow scissoring fights with "sensitive" planes that easily goes into spinns after a snapstall, like the p40 tomahawk p39 and to some extent the slower spits aswell.
And a good 109 driver really can climb out of many situations after turning with a spit or p40
,just because of climbrate, accelleration and the gentle stall on top of maneuvers where the p40, p39 and to a degree also the spit risks the spinn.

I have noticed that its not too unusual to pit the 109g2 against the Tomahawk on servers and the gap in climb and accelleration between them is quite big, compared to the 109F.
I haven't done any hard tests but the G2 climbs up to about 400m further than the Tomahawk from maximum speed in level flight from about 1000m alt. and has no problems in pulling hard on the top of the maneuver even below 200km/h, whereas the p40 cant pull up as hard because it loses speed too fast and it also accellerates much slower and cant pull as hard on the top of maneuvers either and always risks the spinn.

I'm sure that if the 109's turning is toned down a bit it will have a greater problem with the later highperformance planes like La7, late yaks, p63, and such and also be close with the later spits and should be, but haven't these other later fighters also been toned down?
The yaks doesnt seem to hold energy as well as before (I might be wrong though, it was a long time since I flew any but the earliest crappier Yaks).


I anyway like the idea that a p38 can have some good moments with a 109 on occasion http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

anarchy52
01-05-2005, 05:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
You should be able to roll and dive to get out there way, if nothing else use that huge roll advantage to shake them off and that straight line speed, the A5 is very quick on the deck. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Unfortunatelly the roll rate advantage of FW in the game is not that large at all...

OldMan____
01-05-2005, 05:56 AM
Against Spit is still a good advantage. But many planes roll too much well (basing this assumptions on general data I know of.. no specific 120% sure document) at high speeds.

Atomic_Marten
01-05-2005, 06:16 AM
While I agree with anarchy52 that better roll rate doesn't seems to be of much advantage (compared to better elevator, for example), still when we have Spit in mind, that can be good defence weapon.

So I'm with OldMan___ with this one..

Atomic_Marten
01-05-2005, 07:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Atomic_Marten:
Also, it is quite weird that with every newer type of Bf109, speed drops. I thought it would be other way around.
1.Bf109G6AS --588
2.Bf109G10 --584
3.Bf109G14 --579

kph.http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/think.gif http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/stupid.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>faustnik:
Hmmm...I do know that the Bf109G10 came after the G14, not sure where the G6AS fits in though? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes.. G10 is the fastest Gustav there is according to many sources.(inspired by your post, I was doing some search online about issue).

Geez, I'm such n00b.http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/wallbash.gif http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/oops.gif

I have immediatelly ordered the "Messerschmitt Bf109 F-K", by Willy Radinger, published by Schiffer books, just to clear some important stuff up..http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DeerHunterUK
01-05-2005, 07:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by robban75:
Here are some more. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Spitfire MkVb

Spitfire LF MkV

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Robban, Is there any chance of running the same test with the Seafire F.III & Seafire L.III? My theory is the results should be very similar to the Spitfire Vb & Spitfire LF Vb. I'm interested in seeing if there's any difference in speed.

bubiH
01-05-2005, 03:07 PM
Are you guys aware that dive qualities are not completely modelled in this game? FW should have tremendous advantage in sustained dives over Spit, but not in this game. See my other posts if interested. Or test for yourself in QMB, its not difficult.

OldMan____
01-05-2005, 03:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bubiH:
Are you guys aware that dive qualities are not completely modelled in this game? FW should have tremendous advantage in sustained dives over Spit, but not in this game. See my other posts if interested. Or test for yourself in QMB, its not difficult. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has been discussed until exaustion. And yes it is modelled. Just people expect too much from it. I made this experiments so many times I can say speed my FW is with closed eyes during a dive. And it will outpace an Spit at a not too deep dive.

Atomic_Marten
01-05-2005, 05:47 PM
Problem is that Spit IX is a phenomenal diver and it keeps energy well, too.(at least that was in v2.04, I wasn't spend so much time on it now, so mybe something is changed but I doubt that).

WTE_Galway
01-05-2005, 09:23 PM
well one historically well documented fact is the Typhoon was saved from cancellation because the Spitfire Mk V simply could not catch the 190's doing low level "tip and run" ground attack raids on southern England in summer 41

some media reports from the time ..

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/609photos/Media%20Circus.htm

this advantage at low level of the 190 over the mk V does not show up in game

OldMan____
01-06-2005, 03:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
well one historically well documented fact is the Typhoon was saved from cancellation because the Spitfire Mk V simply could not catch the 190's doing low level "tip and run" ground attack raids on southern England in summer 41

some media reports from the time ..

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/609photos/Media%20Circus.htm

this advantage at low level of the 190 over the mk V does not show up in game <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you kidding huh? I can in an a5 keep at 576 kph at sea level. Never saw a Spit V come even close to that speed.

robban75
01-06-2005, 04:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DeerHunterUK:

Robban, Is there any chance of running the same test with the Seafire F.III & Seafire L.III? My theory is the results should be very similar to the Spitfire Vb & Spitfire LF Vb. I'm interested in seeing if there's any difference in speed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here you go. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Seafire F .III

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/SeafireFSLspeed.jpg

Seafire L.III

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/SeafireLSLspeed.jpg

DeerHunterUK
01-06-2005, 04:56 AM
Thanks for that Robban, your results have shed some light on my theory about the Seafire and Spitfire VC. I know that later versions of the VC were fitted with a negative G carburettor (and probably a few other modifications) and the engines were redesignated Merlin 50(M) and 55(M). It just so happens that the Seafire ingame has a Merlin 55 and Merlin 55M (low altiude version). So with the exceptions of the obvious differences of the 4 bladed prop, the exhaust ports (this could actually be correct) and the arrestor hook. The question on my mind is, do we have a Spitfire VC actually ingame already?

WUAF_Darkangel
01-06-2005, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hello

Well, it may be just for me, but AFAIK historically A series (2,3,4) really outclassed Mk5. When flying it, I simply cannot fight against Mk5 (if I do not have huge alt advantage)... (It may well just be me, but normally I have no big problems engaging and downing La7s with 109G2 - online of course). Spit always wins.

Fw climbs worse, about equal speed, has no diving advantage (it should have AFAIK), and let us also leave Mg151 vs Hispano out of debate. It also seems it's engine has 800 instead of 1800 HP :/. So please comment on what is wrong (if there is something wrong in your oppinion) in game about this topic? I know it can also just be my flying, but not only in my hands, but generaly Fw looses against Spit Mk5...

thnx <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm glad im not the only 1, according to: http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/VBv190.htm

"The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'."

I've done repeated climb tests from sea level to 6km and the AI spitfire has a sustained climb advantage over my focke wulf above 2km at various climb angles. Maybe its because i need to put the plane on autopitch? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

And below 2km where the focke wulf has a definite sustained climb advantage the sustainable angle of climb at stall speed between the 2 planes appaers to be identical, i tested both planes myself.

OldMan____
01-06-2005, 07:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Darkangel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hello

Well, it may be just for me, but AFAIK historically A series (2,3,4) really outclassed Mk5. When flying it, I simply cannot fight against Mk5 (if I do not have huge alt advantage)... (It may well just be me, but normally I have no big problems engaging and downing La7s with 109G2 - online of course). Spit always wins.

Fw climbs worse, about equal speed, has no diving advantage (it should have AFAIK), and let us also leave Mg151 vs Hispano out of debate. It also seems it's engine has 800 instead of 1800 HP :/. So please comment on what is wrong (if there is something wrong in your oppinion) in game about this topic? I know it can also just be my flying, but not only in my hands, but generaly Fw looses against Spit Mk5...

thnx <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm glad im not the only 1, according to: http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/VBv190.htm

"The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'."

I've done repeated climb tests from sea level to 6km and the AI spitfire has a sustained climb advantage over my focke wulf above 2km at various climb angles. Maybe its because i need to put the plane on autopitch? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

And below 2km where the focke wulf has a definite sustained climb advantage the sustainable angle of climb at stall speed between the 2 planes appaers to be identical, i tested both planes myself. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I already tested that until exaustion either. Just try making a competition on climbing at high speed.. like never going under 420 kph. Fw will win with no problems

SeaFireLIV
01-06-2005, 09:24 AM
When I first saw the title of this thread I knew it was going to reach at least 4 pages! Hoho! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Still it all looks relatively amicable to my surprise....

p1ngu666
01-06-2005, 11:51 AM
the faber test the raf overreved the engine, and got a entirely different (way better, and different curve to fw factory data)

wonder if those seafires should be faster?

OldMan____
01-07-2005, 03:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
When I first saw the title of this thread I knew it was going to reach at least 4 pages! Hoho! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Still it all looks relatively amicable to my surprise.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is because no one would eve say any of these planes is ├╝ber. So the discussion takes place only at tatics.


About overrev... not that unusual.. if you are trying to save your life you would do it.. so is a valida data. The RPM 190 A4 fliers use in game is at a level (&gt;2700) where the plane could resist only a very few minutes. I usually try to keep under 2300 until is VERY needed extra HP.

Aaron_GT
01-07-2005, 04:39 AM
WTE_Galway wrote:
"This advantage at low level of the 190 over the mk V does not show up in game"

But then we don't have really early examples of either the 190 or the Spitfire V. As time went on the Spitfire V was improved as well to try and counter the 190 (leading to the IX), not just relying on the Typhoon to do all the work The Typhoon has a low roll rate compared to the 190 and about the same turn ability - even if it can keep up with a 190 in terms of low level speed I am not sure I'd want to dogfight a 190 in one. I'd rather take a Spitfire which has a better rollrate at most speeds compared to the Typhoon and a very much better turn radius, if I could get close to the 190 in terms of speed. (The Typhoon's issues were basically solved in the Typhoon II aka Tempest).

p1ngu666
01-07-2005, 10:01 AM
typhoon was bloody fast down low....
typhoon matured by 44 also

plus 4 20mm hispano http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

CV8_Dudeness
01-07-2005, 11:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
But then we don't have really early examples of either the 190 or the Spitfire V. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

we have 16 Lb boost Mk5's in FB

& they were out-sped & out-climbed by 1.42 ATA A4's .. . . let alone A5's

whats your point ?

Aaron_GT
01-07-2005, 04:32 PM
My point is that it is a bit pointless talking about what the relative merits of the 1941 versions of the Spitfire V and 190 were like is a bit pointless when the earliest versions of either that we have are 1942 versions.

Aaron_GT
01-07-2005, 04:33 PM
"typhoon matured by 44 also"

It's roll rate was still terrible, though!

Nubarus
01-08-2005, 02:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CV8_Dudeness:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
But then we don't have really early examples of either the 190 or the Spitfire V. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

we have 16 Lb boost Mk5's in FB

& they were out-sped & out-climbed by 1.42 ATA A4's .. . . let alone A5's

whats your point ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It seems you forgot that there are no Western front A4's and A5's in FB but the Eastern front with more armor and derated engines.

hop2002
01-08-2005, 06:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>we have 16 Lb boost Mk5's in FB

& they were out-sped & out-climbed by 1.42 ATA A4's .. . . let alone A5's <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Fw 190s in game have fairly generous speed modelling. The Spitfire V in game has the same speed at 16 lbs boost as it should have at 9 lbs, in other words it's about 50 km/h too slow at sea level.

The 190 in game is about 100 km/h faster at sea level than the Spit V.

As to climb, I've never seen anything to suggest the Fw 190 at 1.42 ata would outclimb the Spitfire V at 16lbs, in fact quite the opposite.

The comparative test between Faber's 190 and a Spitfire V was done with the Spitfire V using 9 lbs boost, 2850 rpm, (In game WEP is 16 lbs boost, 3000 rpm) and the Fw 190 using 1.35 ata, 2450 rpm (in game WEP is 1.42 ata, 2700 rpm, iirc)

Kurfurst__
01-08-2005, 07:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hop2002:
As to climb, I've never seen anything to suggest the Fw 190 at 1.42 ata would outclimb the Spitfire V at 16lbs, in fact quite the opposite. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You get a new chance every day to learn.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/715_1105194456_spit_sturmovik.jpg

Noticable is the Spitfire VB`s 'generous' modelling in ROC compared to real life specs.

Nubarus
01-08-2005, 08:00 AM
We have +9 boost Spit Vb in this game?

hop2002
01-08-2005, 09:49 AM
Isegrim, that's a Spit Vc with 4 20mm cannon and 480 rounds of ammunition. As such, it loses about 300 ft/min to the Vc with 2 20mm and 240 rounds.

And, the Fw 190 in your chart. It's the A5 the USN tested, isn't it? According to the USN, the weight with 2 cannon was 3942 kg, so in your chart it's nearly 70 kg lighter than it was when the USN tested it, and it only had 2 cannon then.

So, to find a 190 at 1.42 ata outclimbing the Spit V at 16 lbs, you've used a Spit V with 4 cannon, against a 190 with 2 cannon that's 150 lbs lighter than it would be with normal load with 2 cannon.

Typical Isegrim.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>We have +9 boost Spit Vb in this game? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In climb rate, we have a 16 lbs Spit V. However it's only as fast (actually slightly slower) than a 9 lbs Spit V.

robban75
01-08-2005, 10:15 AM
The Fw 190A-5/U4 tested by the USN was most likely not equipped with any boost systems. As can be read in the text, both the Hellcat and Corsair was run at WEP with water injection, but it's not mentioned for the 190, only that the pilot used full throttle but nothing else.
The SL topspeed is given as 537km/h, which is much too low for a 190A-5 using Erh├┬Âten Notleistung.

p1ngu666
01-08-2005, 11:04 AM
a4 doesnt have enhort nostlising? (phoor teh spellin of death)

Kurfurst__
01-09-2005, 07:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hop2002:
Isegrim, that's a Spit Vc with 4 20mm cannon and 480 rounds of ammunition. As such, it loses about 300 ft/min to the Vc with 2 20mm and 240 rounds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That`s why I included the +9;lbs VB without the cannons so the difference can be seen. Unfortunately even the *lighter* Spit VB is inferior/no better than the 190A. Of course you don`t know ANY OTHER +16lbs test for the Spit V either, it`s a good excuse for your beloved Spitfire failing to come to the height of your claims..

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And, the Fw 190 in your chart. It's the A5 the USN tested, isn't it? According to the USN, the weight with 2 cannon was 3942 kg, so in your chart it's nearly 70 kg lighter than it was when the USN tested it, and it only had 2 cannon then. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


No, as usual you make up things. As per FW`s charts, the weight was ~4000kg with four cannons, in fact the USN notes ballast was used to simulate the FULL load with four cannons. Taking out the outer MG FF reduced weight by 135kg.. 4000-135= 3865, the chart has 3875kg. Unfortunately no other curve is available, but it was quite common that the outer guns were removed, as noted by books and the 190A-5 manual itself. Pretty much typical for fighter configuration.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
So, to find a 190 at 1.42 ata outclimbing the Spit V at 16 lbs, you've used a Spit V with 4 cannon, against a 190 with 2 cannon that's 150 lbs lighter than it would be with normal load with 2 cannon.
Typical Isegrim. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Typical Hop. You come in with the usally boring, "British are uber, Spitfires are supreme"-attide, and make a few boosting statements. I come in and correct you, with throughly referenced sources, and you start crying.
Where are YOUR references Hop, "As to climb, I've never seen anything to suggest the Fw 190 at 1.42 ata would outclimb the Spitfire V at 16lbs, in fact quite the opposite.". No-where, as usual. You don`t know what you talk about, just spit the nationalistic cr@p around.

Obviously it`s all about you can`t accept the Spitfire being outdone... in anything. In fact you can`t even accept the fact presented in the chart that they are fairly close in climb.. nonononono! Spitfire is better. The British are supreme. In EVERYTHING.

BTW, I give you an example of 'typical'.

Climb rate of +16lbs Spitfire V at 4000m :

- in real life tests : 16 m/sec
- in Il-2 : 22.5 m/sec

Hop : "In climb rate, we have a 16 lbs Spit V."

LOLOLOL.

WUAF_Badsight
01-09-2005, 07:33 AM
so the 1942 Spitfire MkVb in FB has the top speed of a 9 Lb boosted RL Spitfire MkVb ?

what was the top speed of a RL 1.42 ATA FW-190 A4 ?

robban75
01-09-2005, 07:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
what was the top speed of a RL 1.42 ATA FW-190 A4 ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's for the A-3, but it's the same as A-4.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/fw190_A5_speed.gif

Kurfurst__
01-09-2005, 09:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
so the 1942 Spitfire MkVb in FB has the top speed of a 9 Lb boosted RL Spitfire MkVb ?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK it`s SL speed is too low, and at altitude it`s too fast.

Nubarus
01-09-2005, 12:12 PM
Last I heard all planes except for the FW190 have a better climb rate in IL2 then they had in RL.

WUAF_Badsight
01-09-2005, 02:55 PM
but what was the ETO spec weights for the 190's

wasnt it heavier than the WTO spec 190's & that heavier weight is moddeled in FB ?

robban75
01-09-2005, 03:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nubarus:
Last I heard all planes except for the FW190 have a better climb rate in IL2 then they had in RL. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's worse is the extreme angle of climb that can be performed by planes such as Spit's, 109's Yak's and La's.
I can climb at an 40-45 degree angle at 150-170km/h with Spitfire IXc from SL up to 5000m without having to use any rudder input at all. This can be replicated with the Bf 109, La series and the Yak-3 aswell. I have a track were I do a loop in the Spit IXc with an entry speed of just 230km/h. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

p1ngu666
01-09-2005, 04:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by robban75:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nubarus:
Last I heard all planes except for the FW190 have a better climb rate in IL2 then they had in RL. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's worse is the extreme angle of climb that can be performed by planes such as Spit's, 109's Yak's and La's.
I can climb at an 40-45 degree angle at 150-170km/h with Spitfire IXc from SL up to 5000m without having to use any rudder input at all. This can be replicated with the Bf 109, La series and the Yak-3 aswell. I have a track were I do a loop in the Spit IXc with an entry speed of just 230km/h. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep u can do that now, planes dont lose speed or something as quick as they once did, so u can bnz a 109k4, and he will point nose up and climb upto u!, after u bnz from 1k to 700metres advantage onto him (full throttle)

p1ngu666
01-09-2005, 04:17 PM
oh its really bad for ki43 drivers, cos they need/use the low speed climb advantage

well i do anyways http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

OldMan____
01-10-2005, 04:52 AM
just look at these stats at greter green page and say that A4 is weak .. lool. This is the tabel of most flown planes

Plane flights kill/death ration
Bf-109G-2 2475 1.12
La-5FN 1421 1.16
Bf-109G-6_Late 1417 1.39
Bf-110G-2 1136 1.11
A6M3 1116 1.19
La-5 1025 1.17
Bf-109G-6 966 1.30
Fw-190A-4 916 2.24
SpitfireMkVb 908 1.20
B-25J-1NA 899 0.93