1. #1
    Hi everybody!

    I did some testing lately and came to the conclusion that in ACES 2.0 the Kurf├╝rst seems to have far worse high-speed handling than any other late Bf109 for some unknown reason. It can also stand no chance in a turn fight against any other late Gustav.

    That's odd because the K4 is basically a G10 with a better engine (DB605DB with 1800 [which we have inFB] or DB605DC [with 2000hp; 1800 even without MW50 engaged! ]) and more efficient propellor. It is also only heavier by some 50/60kg which will be easily compensated by the more powerful engine and propellor.

    I'm still working on some representative tracks which clearly show the different speed handling but you can expect them soon...

    -- flying online as JG=52Karaya-X --
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Hi everybody!

    I did some testing lately and came to the conclusion that in ACES 2.0 the Kurf├╝rst seems to have far worse high-speed handling than any other late Bf109 for some unknown reason. It can also stand no chance in a turn fight against any other late Gustav.

    That's odd because the K4 is basically a G10 with a better engine (DB605DB with 1800 [which we have inFB] or DB605DC [with 2000hp; 1800 even without MW50 engaged! ]) and more efficient propellor. It is also only heavier by some 50/60kg which will be easily compensated by the more powerful engine and propellor.

    I'm still working on some representative tracks which clearly show the different speed handling but you can expect them soon...

    -- flying online as JG=52Karaya-X --
    Share this post

  3. #3
    VW-IceFire's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    13,650
    I noticed that...

    I also noticed the wing has some slight differences to the other versions. I always assumed weight was the primary factor...the other thing being that the K-4 picks up speed so quickly that the high speed handeling characteristics fall into place much quicker.

    I also believe that the G-10 and the K-4 do turn about the same. The G-14 and the G-6A/S feel about the same...but the nicest to fly is the G-2.


    RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"
    Share this post

  4. #4
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
    I noticed that...

    I also noticed the wing has some slight differences to the other versions.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    If you mean these long wing bumps on the inner wing structure: You can also find them on the G14... IIRC they were needed because of a completely reworked landing gear


    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
    I always assumed weight was the primary factor...the other thing being that the K-4 picks up speed so quickly that the high speed handeling characteristics fall into place much quicker.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Yes it indeed does pick up speed faster than all other 109s but only by a really small degree. But if you try to turn with various late 109 you WILL notice that they K4 is a LOT worse in turning performance. The G14 is the closest to the G2...

    -- flying online as JG=52Karaya-X --
    Share this post

  5. #5
    Indeed the K-4 is undermodelled in high speed, perhaps for special reason*. A real K-4, travelling at 650 km/h TAS could make a full 360 degree, 5G turn in 24 seconds and on 550m turn radius, at WEP.

    Under similiar conditions in AEP, it requires 35-36 seconds, 50% worser. Thze reason for this you cant pull it enough high Gs, ie. no stalling or popping out of the slats.

    I brought it up to Oleg not long ago, and the answer was on his system it works close to the original specs. Joystick drivers, especially Saitek (thats what I own) are cause of this, so 1C cannot fix it. He told me using the original Microsoft joy drivers instead of supplied drivers solves the problem, but I could not find improvement, perhaps I am using the wrong driver etc.

    It would worth a testing with MS and manufacturer drivers if the problem still exists. If somebody could solve it for himself, please tell me how .

    As for historically, the K4 was the heaviest 109 to see service, but the weight increase was not serious compared to earlier models when compared to tendencies with other planes. Increaseing a/c weight also increases the stick forces because of the inertia, but I doubt this would be a serious factor here, the K-4 being only 10% heavier than the early G-2, and only a few dozen kgs heavier than the G-10.

    The rectangular wing bulges were introduced to cover the increased sized mainwheel, and could also be found on G-10s and G-14s if those were built with large mainwheels. I doubt it would effect characteristics much, in fact they may be even better than the smaller bulges on G-6, as the transition is smoother.



    "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
    - Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

    "One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
    - Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945
    Share this post

  6. #6
    All the 109s are off. Someone pointed out earlier that it's as if the curve is linear, which is wrong. The stick just gets too heavy too soon and way too heavy overall. (this might be based on the report of the Emil which included the infamous reference to the stick being in a bucket of cement, F through K had a different system that was an improvement - also, people forget that the P-51 was known for heavy sticks at high speeds (well all WWII planes were, really). Perhap's they forget that intentionally? lol)

    ==================================
    The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

    Come and spam on our front porch.

    http://www.blitzpigs.com
    Share this post

  7. #7
    I tried that test myself, a 360deg, descending turn at a continuous 650km/h TAS, 3000m altitude, with neutral trim, and I get only 26 seconds time. Certainly nowhere near 35 seconds.

    With even just a hair of tail heavy, like how I normally fly, I can do it in less than 22 seconds (but black out).

    There doesn't appear to be anything terribly ahistorical about the 109K control forces.

    But in generally the forces are screwy. Like how some planes can have basically no control forces whasoever at any speed or altitude (FW, P-51, Ki-84, YP-80) and other planes freeze up at medium speeds at medium altitudes. Also how some, like the P-47, can start off with extremely heavy forces, that magically get feather light in the next patch. Mig-3 used to be light, now in AEP it is rock solid at anything past 500.

    Share this post

  8. #8
    SkyChimp's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    2,896
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
    Indeed the K-4 is undermodelled in high speed, perhaps for special reason*. A real K-4, travelling at 650 km/h TAS could make a full 360 degree, 5G turn in 24 seconds and on 550m turn radius, at WEP.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    But if Oleg modelled it that way, it might stand a chance against a Yak-3 or a La-7. And we can't have that, now can we?

    Regards,
    Share this post

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
    Indeed the K-4 is undermodelled in high speed, perhaps for special reason*. A real K-4, travelling at 650 km/h TAS could make a full 360 degree, 5G turn in 24 seconds and on 550m turn radius, at WEP.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    But if Oleg modelled it that way, it might stand a chance against a Yak-3 or a La-7. And we can't have that, now can we?

    _Regards,_
    http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    First of all K4 stands chance against any plane in the game...so let`s make that clear.
    Second, i started seeing some nice changes in your postings Chimpy, and now you just proved me wrong. Unfortunately.


    As far as all 109s being dogs at high speed, they are not...it starts from G10 and goes up to K4 - the worst one. I never flew real K4 and probably never will lol, but .. take a look at G6/AS which is not that different from K4... and somehow handles whole alot better at high speeds. No russian plane can follow, well american planes can... So? What was that about La7 or Yak3?

    Oh ya, i did report K4 numbness over 550km/h and still waiting on some changes. I hope it will be changed.

    V!
    Regards,



    VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST



    http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

    Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    WWMaxGunz's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,792
    See if cutting the throttle a bit at least in the start of the turns doesn't help. Also setting the stick pitch sliders to all 100's but be real steady after that.

    You all can also try asking Oleg for a track of a 20-some second turn at speed in the K-4 and maybe just learn something not in a history book, like how it's done instead of just that it was done. OTOH maybe you won't get any track.


    Neal
    Share this post

Page 1 of 4 123 ... Last ►►