190 vs yak1

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I'm still right. Can't compare the A3 to the D9 , period.

 

 

But, but....................

 

No, just No. You are not still right about the aircraft. And, as is your habit, you make sweeping statements, then try to justify them with stating that a single element is correct.

 

The aircraft is not completely borked as some state but certain aspects of it's behavior are clearly ahistorical.

 

It's not a single statement by you but a pattern of behavior. You don't own it, you don't know it, your opinion is certainly not informed or of more value than people who utilize it on a (nearly) daily basis and/or are well versed in it's history and performance.

 

Should it absolutely dominate across the performance charts? Probably not but it should not be handcuffed either. To get there requires further review and some fairly minor tweaks. 

 

The technical aspects of the aircraft should conform to pilot accounts; test pilots, line pilots, and adversaries. It should be more capable than it is by all contemporary analysis. It should not be a one note performer within a particularly narrow flight envelope. By all standards the aircraft should be an overall good performer.

 

Further, you are so quick to reply to almost everything pointed your way. You are clearly camping and waiting to respond.

 

Don't feed the trolls...................

Edited April 23, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Wulf]

Dora 9 and Anton 8 has the same Wing. The difference between A3 and A6/A8 is a reinforcement of the structure for the installation of MG151. The wing aera is the same.

 

 

Yes, as noted, the wing on the 190 changed with the introduction of the A-6.  The new wing was lighter and stronger, incorporating a modified interior both for strength and to allow for the installation of MG 151s in the outboard cannon bays.   The outboard 151s were eliminated on the 190 D but the wing (that is to say, as introduced in the A-6) remained otherwise unchanged. 

 

It's kind of interesting when you compare and contrast the La-5 FN with the Focke-Wulf 190 D.  The La-5 had a pretty ordinary rate of roll whereas the La-5 FN, which was essentially a completely new airframe, was probably almost as good as the 190 A.  The FW 190 D on the other hand, while retaining the same wing as the A-6, did not roll quite as well as the A series fighters.

 

For those of you who are sitting there scratching their heads thinking 'gee, how could that be, how could the La-5 FN possibly roll any faster than the in-game La-5', well I'd say that's something you'd have to address in some other part of the forum.  I just don't comment on those sorts of issues anymore.  Not since my last trip to 'the cooler'.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Did you bring your glove and baseball?

[Turban]

 

The aircraft is not completely borked as some state but certain aspects of it's behavior are clearly ahistorical.

 

 

 

Says the person who flies on normal server because "historical fights and the way they happen" aren't his thing but rather arena type fights ? 

 

 

Anyway. I'm out of this thread for now Nothing interesting.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Turban

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Again, misrepresenting what I said a month ago.

 

"Anyway, I'm out of this thread......"

 

Now, if only THAT were true

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Here's an interesting quote I bumped into from elsewhere in the forum. Turban is interested in the ahistorical maneuvering fight and balanced servers. Not surprising he wants a neutered 190 now.

 

Turban's PhotoTurban

Today, 18:09

Tonight on WoL :

 

I took a trophy 109. That was amaziiiiiiiing, to be able to follow 109 in climbs,dive, in everything. AMAZING. Getting rid of the performance difference is something this game will absolutely need to survive.

 

Fighting against the odds all the time is fine but it gets old sometimes. Very, very old. Having competitive planes of both sides also allows for the flying technique to show, since the difference between the planes would be smaller. Right now even someone with lower skills but in a 109 can toast a good pilot in a russian plane. The russian planes sometimes just can't do it. They can't follow the speed, the maneuvers, both combined, etc.

[NooneYouKnow]

I'm well aware of what the FW can do, can't do, what it looks like when in the hands of a good pilot and a bad one  I know what most people describe here isn't a reality in fights. That's my first hand experience

 

Don't call me out on experience unless you have something to show for Cause you don't

Neither do you because you have no first hand knowledge. You have zero experience,zilch, nada. If you haven't flown it, you don't know sh*t. Your just trolling. God only knows what your agenda is.

 

Edit:

Ahhh, from the quote above, "Getting rid of the performance difference is something this game will absolutely need to survive."

 

You want a World of Warplanes balanced game, not a sim that models the aircraft to historic values. It all makes sense now.

Edited April 24, 2016 by NooneYouKnow

[Turban]

Here's an interesting quote I bumped into from elsewhere in the forum. Turban is interested in the ahistorical maneuvering fight and balanced servers. Not surprising he wants a neutered 190 now.

 

Turban's PhotoTurban

Today, 18:09

Tonight on WoL :

 

I took a trophy 109. That was amaziiiiiiiing, to be able to follow 109 in climbs,dive, in everything. AMAZING. Getting rid of the performance difference is something this game will absolutely need to survive.

 

Fighting against the odds all the time is fine but it gets old sometimes. Very, very old. Having competitive planes of both sides also allows for the flying technique to show, since the difference between the planes would be smaller. Right now even someone with lower skills but in a 109 can toast a good pilot in a russian plane. The russian planes sometimes just can't do it. They can't follow the speed, the maneuvers, both combined, etc.

 

lol.     

 

1) Understanding : 0

2)Taking out of context and putting words in my mouth : 10

3)Sensationnalism and hyperbole : 10

4)Desperation caused by lack of argument  : 10

 

 Thanks for the laughs

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

*yawn

[Turban]

 

You want a World of Warplanes balanced game, not a sim that models the aircraft to historic values. It all makes sense now.

 

I see you got fooled by the other poster

 

You should read the other thread where my post belongs instead of blindly following Murf

Edited April 24, 2016 by Turban

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Coming home from party, not quite tired enough to sleep, this Turban guy is pure gold 

[Willy__]

Coming home from party, not quite tired enough to sleep, this Turban guy is pure gold

 

 

Yeah man, sometimes I dismiss the ignore list warnings just to laugh with what he writes   

Edited April 24, 2016 by Herr_Istruba

[MadisonV44]

Coming home from party, not quite tired enough to sleep, this Turban guy is pure gold 

 

Tons of gold indeed. This guy deserve the popcorn medal of the month ...

[Livai]

Indeed, instead of 190 vs yak1 we have a beat battle here......

[Avyx]

How is the Fw 190 A-3 compared to BF 109, in a dog fight, for example ?

[SKG51_robtek]

In short? The 190 is the (under)dog in this fight when started on equal terms.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

How is the Fw 190 A-3 compared to BF 109, in a dog fight, for example ?

 

The 190 has nothing for him against a 109F/G, in BoS.

[Avyx]

I'm sorry but i don't understand what do you mean with " has nothing for him "

[707shap_Srbin]

As main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw:

 

Fw190 vs Pe-2 compared with Yak-1 vs Ju88/He111 - who will get priority - Fw190 or Yak?

 

Fw190 can deliver op to 500kg of bombs (later moder;s can carry even more), it is rather armored and well armed to strafe some soft ground targets.

 

Yak-1 cave little bombs or some 82mm rokets. Unarmored and underarmed.

 

Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

[Dr_Molenbeek]

I'm sorry but i don't understand what do you mean with " has nothing for him "

 

I mean that apart from major advantages the 190 has over 109F/G in BoS (but that he cannot fully use because of the f*cked stall speed) like dive acceleration, high speed energy retention, climbing at +500 km/h... Ze thing that the Fw 190 should have over 109 is a much better roll rate and especially at high speed. It's not case in BoS, simple as that.

 

 

 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Sure, not engaging fighter to fighter is optimal if you can arrange it. Unfortunatley it is common in the sim and was common during the war as well. There are literally no reports of the 190 being a poor air to air combatant or that it's pilots shied away from such a situation, particularly in the west.

 

The 190 is a good fighter bomber and replaced the Stuka in both mission and equipment. The hit and run tactics employed on the Eastern Front reflect the mission and pilots who were trained primarily in the ground attack role with it.

 

It is also an excellent interceptor.

Edited April 24, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[SKG51_robtek]

As main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw:

 

Fw190 vs Pe-2 compared with Yak-1 vs Ju88/He111 - who will get priority - Fw190 or Yak?

 

Fw190 can deliver op to 500kg of bombs (later moder;s can carry even more), it is rather armored and well armed to strafe some soft ground targets.

 

Yak-1 cave little bombs or some 82mm rokets. Unarmored and underarmed.

 

Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

What you are describing is the later F-model 190, the A3 was still as pure a fighter fighter as the 109, which also could carry bombs.

In this game, as it is now, the 190 is outclimbed and outturned by the 109 and the speed difference is marginal.

[Wulf]

As main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw:

 

Fw190 vs Pe-2 compared with Yak-1 vs Ju88/He111 - who will get priority - Fw190 or Yak?

 

Fw190 can deliver op to 500kg of bombs (later moder;s can carry even more), it is rather armored and well armed to strafe some soft ground targets.

 

Yak-1 cave little bombs or some 82mm rokets. Unarmored and underarmed.

 

Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

 

 

main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Actually, that's not correct.  At the time, (in the '30s and '40s) tanks were designed to perform specialized roles.  For example on the German side of the fence, the Mk IV was intended as an infantry support tank while the Mk III was designed for tank on tank fighting.  

 

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw: 

 

No, you're wrong.  The 190 wasn't designed as a "multi-role' fighter if by multi-role you mean as a fighter-bomber.  It was designed as a pure fighter but was found to be more capable than expected.  The decision to 'stretch' the 190 (ie, create the 190 A-5) was in part to take advantage of the types new-found ability to carry heavy ordinance.

 

 Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

 

Yup, it's the FW 190, but it certainly wasn't designed with that role in mind.  Neither was it designed as a torpedo bomber but some 190s were adapted for this role.

[MadisonV44]

How is the Fw 190 A-3 compared to BF 109, in a dog fight, for example ?

 

 

The 190 has nothing for him against a 109F/G, in BoS.

 

Agree.  

 

Even if the max speed of the FW is conform and should give him a superiority in some way, it is quickly spoiled vs a 109 in BOS because of his bad energy retention (huge energy leak) and poor acceleration. High speed stalls also do not help in the maneuverability area.   

Edited April 24, 2016 by MadisonV44

[Art]

As main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw:

 

Fw190 vs Pe-2 compared with Yak-1 vs Ju88/He111 - who will get priority - Fw190 or Yak?

 

Fw190 can deliver op to 500kg of bombs (later moder;s can carry even more), it is rather armored and well armed to strafe some soft ground targets.

 

Yak-1 cave little bombs or some 82mm rokets. Unarmored and underarmed.

 

Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

First Fw 190 was just fighter. 

[JtD]

Fw190vsYak1 speed difference comparison. Reference speed figures Yak-1 from Tsagi book2 and Fw190 from Fw190Aa3 performance data sheet. In game test at 100% power for Yak-1, rads so that 100° water and 105° oil are not exceeded. Fw190 at 85% power.

 

In short, between 3-4km, the Yak's got the advantage in game, stay away from that altitude if you're in the Fw190. Everywhere else, you're at least pretty safe.

[Livai]

main task of a tank is to fight vs infantry and artillery and field fortifications, and a tank-vs-tank was the last and least task for tank, same thing is for fighter aircraft.

 

Actually, that's not correct.  At the time, (in the '30s and '40s) tanks were designed to perform specialized roles.  For example on the German side of the fence, the Mk IV was intended as an infantry support tank while the Mk III was designed for tank on tank fighting.  

 

 

Fw190 is multirole fighter - interceptor and fighter-bomber, so You may compare it by this sides of veiw: 

 

No, you're wrong.  The 190 wasn't designed as a "multi-role' fighter if by multi-role you mean as a fighter-bomber.  It was designed as a pure fighter but was found to be more capable than expected.  The decision to 'stretch' the 190 (ie, create the 190 A-5) was in part to take advantage of the types new-found ability to carry heavy ordinance.

 

 Who is better fighetr-bomber - Yak or Fw190?

 

Yup, it's the FW 190, but it certainly wasn't designed with that role in mind.  Neither was it designed as a torpedo bomber but some 190s were adapted for this role.

 

This sounds better http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/store/fw190/tactical_trials.htm

[MadisonV44]

Fw190vsYak1 speed difference comparison. Reference speed figures Yak-1 from Tsagi book2 and Fw190 from Fw190Aa3 performance data sheet. In game test at 100% power for Yak-1, rads so that 100° water and 105° oil are not exceeded. Fw190 at 85% power.

 

In short, between 3-4km, the Yak's got the advantage in game, stay away from that altitude if you're in the Fw190. Everywhere else, you're at least pretty safe.

 

Max speed is a thing, the acceleration time spent to reach this speed is another.

In BOS Yaks are able to stick like glue to the FW for a very long time before the two planes can reach their respectives max speed. Enough time to make the difference in a lot of cases. 

[Grancesc]

How is the Fw 190 A-3 compared to BF 109, in a dog fight, for example ?

 

In Julius Meimberg memoirs there is a very insightful description of a mock dogfight between him and Egon Mayer. Julius, then appointed squadron leader of 11./JG 2, was teased during a visit to his old squadron (7./JG2) in Poix by Egon Mayer: "have you been set back again to the old 109". Since Julius is full of praise for his new aircraft, both top pilots decide to fight out the battle. Julius describes that he flew a Bf109G-1 without armor plates, free of heavy gear and half fuel load. Egon Mayer flew a standard Fw190A-3. The murderous dogfight that took place on 6 September 1942, is described in over two pages in the book. Quote of Julius Meimberg (translated from the original German text, page 220): "When we landed, without any of us having really come to a shot, we were at the end of our forces - draw"! Julius cannot get himself out of the cockpit of his 109 and Egon has to lean on the fuselage of his Fw to be able to stand upright. Assi Hahn the highly respected group commander of III./JG 2 had followed with interest this dogfight. He says afterwards: "Gentlemen, this is something I've never seen. No, something I've really never seen ".

Here is another sound confirmation (historically documented) that the Fw190A was by no means inferior to the Bf109G in a dogfight.

Source: Julius Meimberg "Feindberührung“, 3/2004 Publisher: NeunundzwanzigSechs ISBN 3-9807935-1-6

[JtD]

What's just as important to note as the actual outcome of this mock fight is the physical exhaustion by the pilots, something we just do not model in game - or can experience at our desks. In real life, the lower workload of the pilot, the ergonomic cockpit and the rather low control forces in the Fw190 make a heck of a difference.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

What's just as important to note as the actual outcome of this mock fight is the physical exhaustion by the pilots, something we just do not model in game - or can experience at our desks. In real life, the lower workload of the pilot, the ergonomic cockpit and the rather low control forces in the Fw190 make a heck of a difference.

 

+1

[Holtzauge]

 

In Julius Meimberg memoirs there is a very insightful description of a mock dogfight between him and Egon Mayer. Julius, then appointed squadron leader of 11./JG 2, was teased during a visit to his old squadron (7./JG2) in Poix by Egon Mayer: "have you been set back again to the old 109". Since Julius is full of praise for his new aircraft, both top pilots decide to fight out the battle. Julius describes that he flew a Bf109G-1 without armor plates, free of heavy gear and half fuel load. Egon Mayer flew a standard Fw190A-3. The murderous dogfight that took place on 6 September 1942, is described in over two pages in the book. Quote of Julius Meimberg (translated from the original German text, page 220): "When we landed, without any of us having really come to a shot, we were at the end of our forces - draw"! Julius cannot get himself out of the cockpit of his 109 and Egon has to lean on the fuselage of his Fw to be able to stand upright. Assi Hahn the highly respected group commander of III./JG 2 had followed with interest this dogfight. He says afterwards: "Gentlemen, this is something I've never seen. No, something I've really never seen ".

Here is another sound confirmation (historically documented) that the Fw190A was by no means inferior to the Bf109G in a dogfight.

Source: Julius Meimberg "Feindberührung“, 3/2004 Publisher: NeunundzwanzigSechs ISBN 3-9807935-1-6

 

 

A very good read, thanks for posting. Now translate that into BoS and see how long the Fw-190 would have lasted against a Me-109 here......

[SKG51_robtek]

I believe that in this dogfight the higher physical forces needed in the 109 negated the theoretical better maeuvrability somehow, something we dont have in game.

[Bearcat]

Hmm, I tried all the planes after latest update, I find all of them easier to fly. What is up with that? There are less to none consequences for tight turns and slow speed. This goes for the FW 190 also.

I simply cannot understand why people claim it to be worser. I find it easier myself. I haven't taken it for a pure dogfight, but I did ground attack with it and manage to dodge two attacks and run away. At least one of them was a Yak. And I was down low. 

I simply do not go turn fights with a Yak down low, mostly because my trackIr lag at this altitude with enemy close up. But I had the feeling I could have done if that had not been the case, it might be the yak was cocky but the luxury of running away in a russian ground pounder you simply do not have 

 

 

Basically flying the plane.. as it is in this sim.. to it's strengths.. Which is what anyone should do in any given sim.

 

Locking... because of the tone.