1. #11
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG26Red:
    I Just wish the FW series, especially the As where more correct, thats all i fly

    BUT no reason to kill the american planes either... i know somebody will egg me with this comment, but this game is made by russians? no wonder the russian planes are so good..

    heres a beer for hoping the TA152, Spit and p38 are properly moddeled and not deballed...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Actualy my favorit plane to fly when im on the Blue side is the FWA9 or A4. The later A9 or D9 kind of feel like what the P-47 was in 1.0. You pull on the stick even just a little bit and the plane would shake. Is that realistic, even if your at like 500kmh TAS?
    Share this post

  2. #12
    RAF testing found little difference in turn ability between the P-51B and the Fw190A. The RAF found the Anton to be a very maneuverable a/c.

    American pilots considered the Fw190s to be superior in maneuverability to the Bf109s that they encountered.


    www.7Jg77.com

    Share this post

  3. #13
    JG26Red's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    500
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
    RAF testing found little difference in turn ability between the P-51B and the Fw190A. The RAF found the Anton to be a very maneuverable a/c.

    American pilots considered the Fw190s to be superior in maneuverability to the Bf109s that they encountered.

    http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
    http://www.7jg77.com

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    high speed manev? low speed? the russians didnt think much of the 190... is that why it is somewhat porked in FB?
    Share this post

  4. #14
    when historical accounts mention "maneuervability" they are not meaning tight turning

    thats why the FW-190 "out maneuervers" the spitfire even tho the spitfire would slaughter the FWs in a turn fight

    the KI-84 does do insane loops at high speed showing unbelieveable elevator authority

    but try showing me even ONE reference about the Hayate was a poor handeler ?

    it was a Awesome design just as Many other japanese designs were

    their historical manufacturing problems that led to poor RL performance IS NOT moddeled

    we get perfectly constructed A/C in FB , all models

    the fact that japanese designs were such good performers might be a shock but too bad

    even their "interceptors" had turn fighting ability

    be thankfull that the "SHINDEN" isnt coming to FB

    we are getting the "RAIDEN" tho hopefully , it had even better performance than the Hayate
    Share this post

  5. #15
    JG26Red's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    500
    I can never fathom why somebody would want to fly a japanese plane, especially if your from USA... uggghh...

    Shinden is pretty interesting, would give the D0335 a good fight, but i think the Doriner would still come out on top...
    Share this post

  6. #16
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
    when historical accounts mention "maneuervability" they are not meaning tight turning
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The RAF report I mention had a specific reference to "turning circle". It stated there was "not much to choose" between the P-51B and 190A turning circle.


    www.7Jg77.com

    Share this post

  7. #17
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG26Red:
    I can never fathom why somebody would want to fly a japanese plane, especially if your from USA... uggghh...

    Shinden is pretty interesting, would give the D0335 a good fight, but i think the Doriner would still come out on top...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Simply put .... the JAF were best prepared for turning fights when WW2 started

    flying the best turn fighters of the day

    & at the end of WW2 appeared the D0335 & Shinden prototype

    seeing as the Shinden would have been just about as fast the the Dornier but with way superior maneuervability i think the Do335 would have been the Shindens play toy
    Share this post

  8. #18
    "Oleg, is the data in the Objects viewer correct?"

    Taken from the object viewer:

    Bf109F4 (1941)
    Engine: Daimler Benz DB601E
    Power:
    Indicated 2390HP
    Take off 3120HP

    So I'd say it's about as reliable as The Hitler Diaries.
    Share this post

  9. #19
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BerkshireHunt:
    "Oleg, is the data in the Objects viewer correct?"

    Taken from the object viewer:

    Bf109F4 (1941)
    Engine: Daimler Benz DB601E
    Power:
    Indicated 2390HP
    Take off 3120HP

    So I'd say it's about as reliable as The Hitler Diaries.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Lmao, lol.

    I was board today and wanted to see if there was actualy a russion plane that could not reach its top speed. Well i found one. But if i say what it is then it might be corrected

    Ill give you a hint. Its Max speed at 5km altitude is 672-700kmh TAS. I managed 667kmh TAS. Nice to know there is one russion plane that cant reach its max speed at altitude.
    Share this post

  10. #20
    Comrades! We all know Forgotten Battles is not perfect! But it is very very good! and it is very fun! and...

    I exclusively fly all FB aircraft.
    Share this post